Seattle Kraken Farm Transactions

[Ryan]

Montreal Releases Michelle Oullette

[Ryan]

Montreal Sends Marc Staal to the Farm

[Ryan]

Montreal Signs Peter Forsberg

[Ryan]

Letang to the farm

[Ryan]

Montreal Signs Matt Hackett to there Farm team.

[Ryan]

Habs Call up Guillaume Latendresse to the big club

[Derrick - Senators]

Latendresse is no longer Canadiens property. He was lost due to maximum games played violation (209) this past year. Furthermore, your trade can not be processed until there is room on your farm team for Kadri.

[Ryan]

I do not see a rule stating once a player loses there status there automatically released from the team, I assumed that a warning would be sent out and when I realized today he was over the 200 games I had called him up immediately, I think it is a little unfair for him to be lost just like that if there is not a specific rule in the approriate section of the rulebook.....as for Kadri since there is currently no room on my farm roster he is to go to my main roster until room is made for him.

so again until there is a specific ruling on the loss of Player status I feel that I should not lose him, although it was a mistake on my part this is just minor and feel it is a little unfair

[Ryan]

ok besides the previous issue id also like to:

Call up: David Booth, Luke Schenn

send down:Nazem Kadri

signs Carter AShton to the farm

[Derrick - Senators]

In regards to Kadri:
E) Prior to the conclusion of the current year’s Prospect Draft, no player may be signed/called up to one’s farm team or main roster who does not currently have AHL/NHL experience. Players possessing “Minor Leaguer” eligibility are exempt from this rule.

[Derrick - Senators]

Carter Ashton is Columbus Blue Jacket Property.

[Ryan]

ok so Gustavsson cannot be signed to your team.....correct?

[Ryan]

Jul 12, 2009 21:36:40 GMT -5 Derrick - Senators said:

Carter Ashton is Columbus Blue Jacket Property.

damn sorry I had missed that, guess the Search function doesnt work or i Mis-spelled it or something

[Derrick - Senators]

Youre just now realizing Latendresse is over 200 games? His minor league eligibility ran out March 26th, not to mention the weeks leading up to his 200th game that you had to acknowledge the fact.

With the way the system is set up, I do not feel as though everything needs to be explained as if we were in grade school. I think it is fairly obvious that once a player exceeds the limit, he is no longer a minor leaguer by definition, therefore making said player ineligible to be on the farm. Are you suggesting that I monitor every player on every team babysitting the general managers and warning them when their players are about to run out of a certain eligibility? no. That is not my responsibility. And if so, once the player reaches 200 games played he hangs in some sort of farm team limbo until you or whichever manager that is in question decides to make room for him? Why even have rules at all then? I assume then that people who forget that their players run out of prospect status should be extended the same leniency when said managers try and send prospects down after 150 games played? Oops? Oh well?

Just because there isn't a hard rule about something does not mean we ignore common sense. If this is the case, the rest of the league might as well not even show up to play next season because I am declaring myself the winner of the league. Just like that. I am allowed to do that because there isn't a rule in the rulebook that states that I can't.

[Derrick - Senators]

Jul 12, 2009 21:37:00 GMT -5 Ryan said:

ok so Gustavsson cannot be signed to your team.....correct?

as was discussed in my farm transactions thread...

EDIT: Further Clarification

Prior to the conclusion of the current year’s Prospect Draft, no player may be signed/called up to one’s farm team or main roster who does not currently have AHL/NHL experience. Players possessing “Minor Leaguer” eligibility are exempt from this rule.

This is to be read as no prospect on your farm team may be called up to your active roster if they do not possess nhl/ahl experience. Also, the "signing" prohibits prospects to be signed to the main roster, which is/was not the case with Gustavsson. He was signed directly to my farm as per the "prospects with less than 10 nhl gp" rule.

The idea behind the rule/rules is to prohibit managers from calling up 9 players and then scooping up 9 new prospects or minor leaguers and trying to trade them away or only having to drop them later. The 10 games or less allows those managers who like to scout and remain active during the offseason the freedom to do so and reap the benefits of their labor

[Ryan]

either way you want us to read it it states

Prior to the conclusion of the current year’s Prospect Draft, no player may be signed/called up to one’s farm team or main roster who does not currently have AHL/NHL experience. Players possessing “Minor Leaguer” eligibility are exempt from this rule.


it is not clear in defining what your saying it should be read as, what I am reading is to sign a player to your farm or Main roster they must have AHL/NHL experience.......

now I feel that with that in the rules it clearly states the intentions and however odd it may be to have it in the rulebook, it is there, you put it there, and you should not be able to manipulate at all, if it is to be changed it should not be changed immediately due to it being convenient to you.

Ryan

[Derrick - Senators]

now I feel that with that in the rules it clearly states the intentions and however odd it may be to have it in the rulebook, it is there, you put it there, and you should not be able to manipulate at all, if it is to be changed it should not be changed immediately due to it being convenient to you.

I am getting mighty fed up with the accusatory statements. It is getting to the point where I can do no right. I can't even make a farm transaction without a huge uproar or raucous. It is also very irritating that the only time managers want to be active is when they are complaining or picking apart a rule or process. The very same rule or process that they (apparently) did not want to be apart of in the first place, as evidenced by the inactivity and lack of interest when I call out to the league for involvement in the rule making process. The rule book isn't going to write itself.

The rule is there yes, I put it there, yes. With that said, it is completely naive, short-sighted, and shows just how out of touch you are, suggesting I am "manipulating a rule immediately due to it being convenient to me."

I suppose it was a convenience to me to allow Boston to sign Shirokov on June 10th nafhl2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=boston&action=display&thread=123&page=5
or when San Jose signed a host of players nafhl2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=sanjose&action=display&thread=312&page=5 (not to mention the subsequent discussion relating to this very rule in question).
Or how about when Buffalo signed Hanson, Stahlberg, and Mitchell, July 3rd, 6th, respectively? nafhl2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=buffalo&action=display&thread=130&page=3
These are just the signings BEFORE I signed Gustavsson, there have been multiple other signings since.

Jul 13, 2009 5:56:02 GMT -5 Ryan said:

it is not clear in defining what your saying it should be read as, what I am reading is to sign a player to your farm or Main roster they must have AHL/NHL experience.......

The fact of the matter is that there is zero evidence to suggest that the rule is intended to be interpreted as you are suggesting it be read. On the contrary, discussion in both the Ottawa and San Jose farm transaction threads, coupled with the aforementioned signings, and firsthand testimony (when asked on MSN to clarify the rule by other managers), clearly indicates the rules true intention. It is insulting to insinuate that I am so careless to have a subsequent rule that is in clear contradiction with a rule that is already in the rule book (can sign players with less than 10 NHL gp before the prospect draft). And even more insulting that I am being accused of rule manipulation and/or cheating.

If the rule is to be read as you so boldly claim, you seem to have gotten your wires crossed when signing Matt Hackett and attempting to sign Ashton Carter, just days ago.
nafhl2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=montreal&action=display&thread=291&page=5

I'll be in my office if you need anything else.

[Ryan]

imho I think how your saying the rule is, is how it should read, with it reading differently I feel it is causing some problems for sure......I signed players I did not have my wires crosses, how am I to stay active if everyone else signs prospects and I do not.....I can't.

with us having issues with this type of thing(signing undrafted players) I feel this could have been avoided which im not sure what had happened here. and I and along with every other gm around here appreciates all the time you are putting into this(im a commish in another league and I know how much work it is) and I know it is hard to try to please everyone(it just cannot be done) but again what I am not understanding is how this rule is not clear after multiple mishaps.

[Derrick - Senators]

The rule was written poorly. That's all there is to it. There is no reason for any mishap, any accusation, or a big deal to be made about it other than what it is. In my opinion, the original intention of the rule is clear, however the wording can be taken in two different ways. Simple solution: re-write the rule.

[Phil - Blue Jackets]

Jul 13, 2009 15:42:54 GMT -5 Ryan said:

imho I think how your saying the rule is, is how it should read, with it reading differently I feel it is causing some problems for sure......I signed players I did not have my wires crosses, how am I to stay active if everyone else signs prospects and I do not.....I can't.

with us having issues with this type of thing(signing undrafted players) I feel this could have been avoided which im not sure what had happened here. and I and along with every other gm around here appreciates all the time you are putting into this(im a commish in another league and I know how much work it is) and I know it is hard to try to please everyone(it just cannot be done) but again what I am not understanding is how this rule is not clear after multiple mishaps.

That might be one of the worst manglings of the English language I've ever seen. I have no idea what you said here. How are you supposed to stay active if everyone else signs prospects and you don't? First of all, huh? Second of all, when did being active necessarily include signing prospects? On a general note, we've been signing undrafted and previously drafted yet unsigned prospects for years now. I don't see what the complications are.