Waiver wire and Prospect Promotion Rule Proposal

Greetings Everyone,

As you know we had a spirited discussion proor to the draft tegarding the failed rule proposals - proposals that nevertheless held majority support from members of the league.

Out of that conversation came a suggestion that we combine elements of the proposals to address some of the concerns felt by a majority of the pool;

- That the waiver wire system is too complicated and unwieldy, and that resolving waiver wire conflicts has xreated a huge and unecessary complex body of rules

- That teams are using the wire rather than making trades

- That teams with promotable prospects are unfairly punished for trying them out in ways that real NHL teams are not

The proposal that emerged was;

A. Eliminate the waiver wire and IR rules.

B. Create a true 'Farm team' system , where prospects can be promoted to and from the team without cost in waiver picks of in placing players on the wire.  (Players displaced by prospect promotion would now be listed under 'Farm Team' instead of IR or waivers)

C. Maintain current rules regarding number of players protected at WDs, ensuring that excess talent would still be made available at WDs.

The benefits of this proposal are projected to be;

- End the practice of 'drafting to cut', where a team with a promotable prospect drafts a player at that position with no intention of ever playing them but purely so they can be placed on waivers.

- Stop the ongoing madness of waiver wire rules, tracking, multiple bids, etc., and simplify our rulebook substantially.

- Improved utility of prospects.

- More accurate representation of how NHL prospects are used.

There was a great deal of verbal support for this measure, and I'd like to think it borders on unanimity. PLEASE put your comments and suggestions below so we can debate this properly long before we have to consider viting on it.



Moriarty said...

at first blush, I think you have put into words what we have discussed over the last two years - I think I like your idea!

Moriarty said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
wildwolf said...

Would have been nice to have been included in the discussion :-(

Cameron said...

You certainly weren't being excluded deliberately! The discussions were very haphazard with lots of crosstalk, and nothing was formalized at all. Hence my post above to try and keep things above ground with everyone debating the same thing rather than a variety of things all at once.

Douglas McLachlan said...

So who is on the Waiver Wire?

Asking for a friend.

Bladerunner said...

Amazing players currently on the waiver wire... J.Staal, Vlasic and T.Erixon. I hope your friend is happy bidding on them ;-)

I'm not 100% sold on this potential rule change as thinking that there is possibility that 'free' usage of prospects is going to continue to kill trading in this pool(hence my also voting against any further prospects). I of course love the idea of killing the current waiver wire for all the reasons listed by Cam.

Cameron said...

Hey Brian,

I respect your concerns about trading, but I think the logic here is sound. Fewer players going to the waiver wire means more players available for trade.

Also, GMs with injury issues (see: Doug) won't have the WW to aquire replacements from without making a trade.

The previous system operated under the assumption that GMs would pay a 'cost' for promoting a prospect freely, either in a released player, or by loss of WD pick, thus benefiting everyone. The new proposal maintains the basic cost, in that active rosters must be trimmed to a fixed number of players. What I am saying is that any player that would currently hit the WW would eventually still be made available at the Waiver Draft.

Scourge said...

I agree with Brian and dont like unlimited promotions of prospects. I think there should be some sort of penalty or you end of with just a larger bench of players to swap in and out of active roster.

Darwin's surprise said...

Encouraging trading is all well and good, but there are occasions when GMs lack the time to make trades. And there are GMs who have limited interest in making trades. Those are neither of them curable, no matter the penalty/limitation put upon promoting prospects. So, given that we already have a bench roster, making it bigger doesn't significantly reduce the likelihood of trading, IMO.

Darwin's surprise said...

If we really want to emulate the NHL though, we should grant each prospect 3 weeks of ice time (that's approx the 9 game limit). After that, someone has to go down to the "Farm Team", be it the prospect or an rfa/ufa. In the event that it's an rfa/ufa, that player should be available for any other team to poach. It would be almost like having a waiver wire again! What fun!

Cameron said...

Hey Chris,
Yes, and No. Unless we expand the # of prospects the # of players available to any team remains the same. The only change comes in when the players become available. Currently when a team promotes a prospect the player is released to make room immediately. Under this proposal those players would still need to be released, but it would be done at the WD1 instead of the waiver wire.

So its not that we have a larger bench under this proposal, but a more effective one, and one that better reflects how the NHL works.

But maybe I misunderstand the concerns you and Brian have. Can either of you give me an example of what you are worried about?

Cameron said...

Hey Corey, as I see it there are two misconceptions at work , we are not expanding the farm teams (though I would love it, that isn't part of the proposal), just making the use of our current prospects less cumbersome, and simplifying our rules by eliminating the WW.

Secondly, any player that would currently end up on the waiver wire would still be made available to everyone, but it would be at WD1, instead of minutes after they are drafted. Only prospects on the farm would be exempt from WD cuts, so you can't hide them from a WD.

Lastly, while I actually like the idea of 9 game trials for prospects, to make it reflective it would be only for P1s, and...well lets just agree its likely too complicated to have sliding contracts, GP and bonus implications, etc. But the principle of pulling up a prospect to replace an injured player is already established in both the NIL and FUNHL, we are just trying to make it as sensible, and simple, as possible.

Bladerunner said...

I hear you Corey re. GMS sometimes not having time to make trades - totally understand. GMs who don't like or want to make trades though - I'll never understand (why be in a pool?)

Cam - I can give you specific examples but I don't want to target particular GMs or situations that I can think of from 2014-15 season, as I have no intent to insult anyone. Let me just give general example that if a GM doesn't have to make a trade, or not have a consequence of losing a WD pick - because he can just freely promote/demote a prospect ... it hurts the pool in that other teams who desperately need to make a deal have much less option of doing so. I might not be making sense - email sometimes tricky to get thoughts across vs verbal discussion.

Bladerunner said...

I do respect everyone's opinions and thoughts though - some good discussion and ideas going on. I'm sure we'll figure out something that works for everyone.

Bladerunner said...

I do respect everyone's opinions and thoughts though - some good discussion and ideas going on. I'm sure we'll figure out something that works for everyone.

Scourge said...

Maybe I am missing something. Basically under your proposal all prospects can be used at any time without penalty correct and will be returned to their protected slots in the prospect list and not exposed at the wd. Basically how the pool exists post wd2

Cameron said...

-> Chris, yes. My point was that any players that would have been cut to the Wire under the current system, would still be cut in the new system but at WD1

->Brian, Sadly, we cannot compel people to make trades even when in their best interests!

As for your concern about it hurting trades, consider the following real life example;

Doug's Lw suffers an injury in pre-season, currently he waits until somebody promotes a prospect and scoops a free LW off the waiver wire.

Under the proposed system, no free LW will be available on the wire, and his only recourse now is to make a trade.

The problem with the current system is that when a team has a prospect they know they will promote, they draft 'junk' at that position, knowing full well they can promote the prospect and waive the junk player. So the 'problem' in creating a trade enviro ment isn't the promotion of a prospect - teams will still do that under both systems, the problem is thatbthere is mo incentive to make a trade for Doug when he can simply pull a guy off the wire.

Templar said...

While I hear Chris and Brian's concerns about prospects, I must ask them this...
Why else do we have Prospects? Just to sit on our bench to show off the rest of the league? To only use as IR replacements? To only "promote", therefore putting another player on Waivers, and being penalized for that move? I would like to think all of the above, except the penalty.

Here is the core of the proposal as I brought it up at the ED.

By freeing up the 'unconditional' use of our Prospects, we (A) Increase the value of our prospects. (B) Can eliminate the Waiver Wire. (C) Increase the possibility of trades, because someone has a player on their roster that may fill a need on someone else's roster, and can only be acquired because we do not have a WW. (D) GM's may actually draft Prospects who will see real NHL play within 1 or 2 years, again increasing value, and movement via trade. Keep in mind we are not able to fully understand why some GM's draft a certain way anyway.

Waiver Drafts still have value, but a GM will not have to suffer watching their season go down the drain because of an injury, and having their hands tied because of this 'penalty' for using an asset on their roster.

I firmly believe that if we can not fully utilize our prospects, why even have them.

The plain truth is, if we are concerned about the lack of interaction in the league, then we ALL need to start by participating in the ED and WD, instead of sending in a list.

We try to set dates far in advance, so we need to show some courtesy to the rest of the league, and participate.