Author Topic: Waivers  (Read 5676 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline -BA-

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 5787
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :MIN-NFL:
    • :MIN-NBA:
    • :WAS-NHL:
    • :Michigan:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #30 on: September 09, 2011, 12:44:46 PM »
I think the 50% way is the best way to go.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"You go to the box. Two minutes by yourself and... you feel shame. You know... and then you get free."

Offline Rob

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 19243
  • Bonus inPoints: 3
    • :NE:
    • :BOS-NBA:
    • :BOS-NHL:
    • :NewHampshire:
    • :NER:
    • :BOS:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #31 on: September 09, 2011, 12:47:18 PM »
The claiming teams percentage of the contract changes depending on the type of waiver in the NHL.  When a player is waiver to be placed in the minors and is claimed the claiming team is on the hook for the full contract.  However if the player is called up from the minors and goes through re-entry waivers the claiming team is only responsible for 50% of the contract while the waiving team is on the hook for 50%. 

Our waivers are more like the unconditional relase/ minor league assignment and therefore the claiming team would have to take on the whole salary.  However I wouldn't be opposed to having the claiming team be on hook for only 50% of the contract in this league. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waivers_(NHL)

Awesome, thanks for clarifying that.  If there's overwhelming support for it I wouldn't mind implementing a waiver system similar to how the NHL handles it but I'd prefer to do it the simpler way as it makes things easier on my end!

Let's see what some other people think and go from there.  Also need your opinions on the priority method, either way is fine by me. 
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline snugerud

  • League Moderator
  • MVP
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 4392
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • I am the ghost of fantasy hockey past
    • :NE:
    • :TOR-NBA:
    • :PIT-NHL:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #32 on: September 09, 2011, 01:01:15 PM »
either one,  what ever is easiest.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Bro-Lo El Cunado

BrewCrew

  • Guest
Re: Waivers
« Reply #33 on: September 09, 2011, 06:10:27 PM »
As for Sam, I told myself I wasn't even going to respond to your nonsense, and this will be the last time I will.  You received 2 good prospects for nothing in your deal with Montreal, then you oppose a similar deal that was far more fair.  Now you oppose a proposal to fix the problem.  None of this makes any sense to me.  You also recently supported an idea proposed to increase the cap after the draft which would have a direct effect on the strategies we all used in our initial extensions and the draft.  Unlike this change which really has no effect on the strategies we all used to get to this point.  You've contradicted yourself on every level and unlike Whomp who offers a constructive criticism and potential alternative, you offer nothing other than your typical venom.  I don't appreciate your insulting PM.  I thought perhaps you changed your ways after you were nearly banned from the site for this same nonsense.  I guess I was wrong.  We've quickly built one of the best leagues on ProFSL and I won't have this kind of drama ruin that.  If you don't like it you can move on, we'll have no problem finding an owner for the Kings.  Grow up or get out.

1.) I never said that the trade I made was fair, and I would have had no issues with it being veto.
2.) This doesn't fix the proposal, and I like it how it is, so why do I NEED to propose something new?
3.) I have yet to contradict myself once.
4.) I don't appreciate insulting me in the forums, and then you lock that post so I can't say anything in defense.
5.) There is no need for anything about me changing, completely uncalled for and yet I'M the one that needs to grow up...


Honestly, I don't care anymore. I still think this a great league, yes, but all this non sense is not needed. Then for you to just drop something like this is completely uncalled for. Say what you want, frankly this has just become laughable to me and if you are really gonna say that you don't appreciate name calling after what you did and what you just said here, you are your favorite word then, a hypocrite.


On track, can someone explain how this is a good change?
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline -BA-

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 5787
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :MIN-NFL:
    • :MIN-NBA:
    • :WAS-NHL:
    • :Michigan:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #34 on: September 09, 2011, 06:46:45 PM »
Brewcrew, what is your issue with the newly proposed rule outside of the fact that you don't like this changing at this point in the season? If this rule had been there from the start would you have had an issue with it?

It seems to most people that have responded that it seems like an better system than what we were running under in the first place. I am generally not fond of changing rules on the fly, but I think there was an issue here than can be exploited to an extent.

In addition to the old rule having a loophole, it also created a problem where every time we had a trade like this (2 being every time), it created friction, some by myself for sure, because I didn't like it for one. I think this new proposal feels more like the real system they use, which is part of what this league is trying to recreate.

You are certainly welcome to disagree with the change, I would bet out of 20 people  you are not alone, but I don't think this is an issue that should be a deal breaker for teams. If there are issues that you have with this specific setup, outside of timing, please state what it is.

I am a firm believer in that when you do go about changing a rule after the initial start of the league, that you should have a certain level of buy in from the teams in the league. Now you may be the one in a 19-1 ruling or you might be 1 of 10. I dont' know, but it seems most people that have chimed in are in favor.

I just want to make sure from here on out, we keep this conversation constructive by all parties.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"You go to the box. Two minutes by yourself and... you feel shame. You know... and then you get free."

Offline winter

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 2031
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :PIT-NHL:
    • :MUN:
    • :blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #35 on: September 09, 2011, 07:50:59 PM »
What you guys are discussing is pretty much being used in Backyard NHL. Drew has this area covered extremely well. Look at rules - waivers, to get an idea. Very simple, very to the point.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
:SC-NHL: 2020-21 Backyard NHL Stanley Cup Champion :PIT-NHL:

It's a great day for hockey!

Offline Anthony

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 10065
  • Bonus inPoints: 10000
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #36 on: September 09, 2011, 08:33:00 PM »
I say open up a poll with the waiver way or the current way. Majority vote and the rule gets changed. This way there is no arguing, we will have a count of votes instead of just a bunch of opinions, and the voting stays anonymous.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

BrewCrew

  • Guest
Re: Waivers
« Reply #37 on: September 10, 2011, 12:40:52 AM »
Brewcrew, what is your issue with the newly proposed rule outside of the fact that you don't like this changing at this point in the season? If this rule had been there from the start would you have had an issue with it?

It seems to most people that have responded that it seems like an better system than what we were running under in the first place. I am generally not fond of changing rules on the fly, but I think there was an issue here than can be exploited to an extent.

In addition to the old rule having a loophole, it also created a problem where every time we had a trade like this (2 being every time), it created friction, some by myself for sure, because I didn't like it for one. I think this new proposal feels more like the real system they use, which is part of what this league is trying to recreate.

You are certainly welcome to disagree with the change, I would bet out of 20 people  you are not alone, but I don't think this is an issue that should be a deal breaker for teams. If there are issues that you have with this specific setup, outside of timing, please state what it is.

I am a firm believer in that when you do go about changing a rule after the initial start of the league, that you should have a certain level of buy in from the teams in the league. Now you may be the one in a 19-1 ruling or you might be 1 of 10. I dont' know, but it seems most people that have chimed in are in favor.

I just want to make sure from here on out, we keep this conversation constructive by all parties.

I just don't see how it helps? It essentially leaves no way to get rid of a players contract. I guess that, yes, that is realistic, but things like that can really hinder a franchise.

As for if it was in place to start the year, I may have said something, but I would just have to live with it since that's the way we would have used. The reason I'm saying you can't change it now is because there have already been a few people that have made drops and have had 1/2 of the contract come off the books. I don't think that is fair to all teams that you are changing it now.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Rob

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 19243
  • Bonus inPoints: 3
    • :NE:
    • :BOS-NBA:
    • :BOS-NHL:
    • :NewHampshire:
    • :NER:
    • :BOS:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #38 on: September 10, 2011, 11:11:02 AM »
What you guys are discussing is pretty much being used in Backyard NHL. Drew has this area covered extremely well. Look at rules - waivers, to get an idea. Very simple, very to the point.

Yea he's mimicking the NHL pretty accurately.  Like I said I wouldn't mind doing it this way though I'd prefer the simpler method. 

Good idea Anthony, I'll throw up a poll.  I do like also getting people to chime in on things as there's often gray areas that should be discussed. 
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline shooter47

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2011
  • Posts: 4936
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :MIN-NFL:
    • :MIN-NBA:
    • :MIN-NHL:
    • :NorthDakotaState:
    • View Profile
Re: Waivers
« Reply #39 on: September 10, 2011, 02:42:04 PM »
Just so I have this all correct before I vote.  The only way to get the 50% reduction in the contract is if someone claims the player on waivers right?  If the player clears waivers then the original team is still stuck with the whole contract?
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Daddy: A lot. I think about $300 per season.
    Yesterday at 05:24:18 PM
  • Daddy: Added to the cable bill of like $200. That nobody ever used.
    Yesterday at 05:25:01 PM
  • Daddy: So i had DirecTV for 12 months to use Sunday ticket for 3 months and paid like 3 installments of roughly $100 added to my $200m bill.
    Yesterday at 05:26:18 PM
  • Daddy: For that i got two TVs that could watch any game any time any where. Problem is they getting played at the same times. You cant watch every game. Why you charging me for every game?
    Yesterday at 05:27:40 PM
  • Daddy: If thats the case i should have access to 32 different monitors. Right?
    Yesterday at 05:30:19 PM
  • Daddy: Or maybe 16. I would take 16. But two. Give me my bread back Mafia!
    Yesterday at 05:31:38 PM
  • Daddy: Making me watch  Bo Nix + Zach Wilson + Jared Stidham = you should be paying me
    Yesterday at 05:33:56 PM
  • Daddy: Me and coach Payton [link]
    Yesterday at 05:34:53 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Thats cap by the way. I pay for my own way to watch my team
    Yesterday at 05:41:55 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I dont have your account or login
    Yesterday at 05:42:07 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I used yours for 1-2 seasons.
    Yesterday at 05:43:32 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I used my mothers for a decade before that
    Yesterday at 05:43:46 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: But ive used my way for the past few years. Ill be paying attention like i said
    Yesterday at 05:44:27 PM
  • Daddy: She deserves a refund too
    Yesterday at 05:46:27 PM
  • Daddy: The point was DirecTV never got in your pockets and it was a rip-off but they had a monopoly on the product. Im not loving all the streaming games but DTV will be paying $$$.
    Yesterday at 05:48:22 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: The new iteration with Youtube TV isnt the greatest either but an improvement on Directtv version
    Yesterday at 05:48:37 PM
  • Daddy: And your grandfather used it every year besides those two :rofl:
    Yesterday at 05:49:26 PM
  • Daddy: I kept DirecTV and always willing to share. But thats my point.
    Yesterday at 05:49:47 PM
  • Daddy: If i had 3 monitors rather than two or four rather than two, either me or moms save money. Lots of it.
    Yesterday at 05:50:26 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Yea your point is just wrong is all. Theyve gotten into my pockets directly and indirectly
    Yesterday at 05:51:03 PM
  • Daddy: Oh, i was unaware. DTV must have got us all.
    Yesterday at 05:51:55 PM
  • Daddy: I know you dont endorse them. Never did. I paid for lots of crap i never used. Just for NFL Sunday Ticket.
    Yesterday at 05:52:45 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I dont and didnt endorse cable period. The irony is streaming is becoming cable now.
    Yesterday at 05:55:39 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I paid for directtv version 1-2 years when i had my apartment. Not as much as the 35+ crowd but they did
    Yesterday at 05:56:34 PM
  • Daddy: Still never watched a game on YouTube. I miss the days of CBS = AFC >> FOX/NBC = NFC >> ABC = MNF
    Yesterday at 05:56:42 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: There was no reason to have directtv outside of sunday ticket. My apartment couldnt get it so i paid ONLY for sunday ticket
    Yesterday at 05:57:04 PM
  • Daddy: I was ok with TNF & SNF.
    Yesterday at 05:57:43 PM
  • Daddy: Its all over the place now. So ive stuck with what i know. The Ticket. I can't miss a Rams game. Not gonna do it.
    Yesterday at 05:58:45 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Now they stream some games only on amazon and peacock. I need a streaming lawsuit
    Yesterday at 06:01:20 PM
  • indiansnation: Dont forget disney + soon u will stream games pn their
    Yesterday at 09:43:09 PM
  • indiansnation: Disney trying yo buy nfl network and using espn as part of the trade off nfl will own a certain % of espn. First deal eas 70m for nfl network but nfl turned that down real quick
    Yesterday at 09:46:43 PM
  • indiansnation: Anyone want to talk trade nfl live,mlb live,fgm,armchair
    Yesterday at 10:00:02 PM
  • indiansnation: And any other league that im in that i didnt post yet
    Yesterday at 10:00:35 PM
  • Daddy: They keep throwing insane money at the NFL to televise games and owners share those shiny pennies just enough with the players.
    Yesterday at 10:39:25 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: I'm available.  Not sure if we match up anywhere other than NHL Live, but let me know if there's something you're interested in @Brian
    Yesterday at 10:45:39 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: The other leagues for me are FGM, MLB Live and DNHL in case any-one else is looking to do a deal
    Yesterday at 10:49:01 PM
  • Daddy: Healthy mix. Couple baseball, couple hockey, different scoring options.
    Yesterday at 11:08:15 PM
  • Daddy: You probably kick ass in all of them although NHL LIVE hasnt officially started.
    Yesterday at 11:08:42 PM
  • Daddy: I respect your gaming options
    Yesterday at 11:09:54 PM
  • Daddy: I would for sure be an FGM or Armchair owner if i were here for baseball. Powerhouse too. Why not? Great leagues with better LMs.
    Yesterday at 11:16:38 PM
  • Daddy: DNHL must be 15 years old. Gotta be doing something right. Most leagues dont make it past 5. Very few make it 10.
    Yesterday at 11:20:45 PM
  • Daddy: I think Rob been running that league longer than ive been on profsl. Legendary LM.
    Yesterday at 11:22:42 PM
  • indiansnation: Jmntl82 pm important messave about armchair
    Yesterday at 11:45:05 PM
  • jmntl82: indiansnation-replied
    Yesterday at 11:48:26 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: thanks @daddy.  I hold my own
    Today at 12:05:43 AM
  • Braves155: Will be around today for deal talks - ANY sport
    Today at 10:12:32 AM
  • Daddy: You tellem @Braves!
    Today at 11:47:14 AM
  • IndianaBuc: Braves PM
    Today at 03:04:47 PM
  • Braves155: Back
    Today at 03:10:34 PM
  • IndianaBuc: Back
    Today at 03:19:17 PM