Shawn Horcoff retires

[JiriHrdina]

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/ho...roit-red-wings

[SportsJunky]

Paul Gaustad too I think.

[JiriHrdina]

Yup you are right

[Cheese]

Darn..was hoping Gaustad had one more year

[droopydrew19]

I have to question how a newspaper article can deem one player is retired and not another.

I have asked about Eric Brewer before based on his local paper and wikipedia yet he still eats a chunk of my cap as a "not retired player".

http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/s...-end-1.2146571

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Brewer

"Brewer was not resigned by the Maple Leafs and released as a free agent on July 1, 2015. He spent the entire summer training in hopes of landing an NHL job but realized by mid-August that he was unlikely to find a team interested in his services.[73] He has since quietly retired."


I had a similar issue with Jose Theodore. He was working for RDS but because he never came out and said "I'm done" I was stuck with him.

Some players take years to file retirement papers with the league and I am pretty sure many of them do it without fanfare.

[flambers]

http://test.en.canoe.stats.com/nhl/recenttrans.asp

Its a tough item to find supporting info for retirements. Calgary Sun website however has Shawn Horcoff listed as retired.

[droopydrew19]

Further to my last comment.... I once had Roenick. He actually said he was retiring. So he was released. And then weeks later signed a deal. In the CPHL, we had to put him up for bids.

So obviously he didn't truly retire. There is a lot of gray area on this issue IMO

[MJK]

We could revisit the Kovalchuk case study where he retired from the NHL but not hockey...good times!

[droopydrew19]

I would think If a player sits out a calendar year without even playing in the AHL or Europe they are pretty much retired.

There are multiple cases where players come back from Europe. I cant think of any player ever coming back after sitting out a year.

[JiriHrdina]

Yeah this is always tricky and now one policy seems like it ever fully deals with every situation or scenario.
Moreover, in some cases the GM WANTS the player to retire to free up cap space - in which case a more liberal definition would favor things.
However, in some cases the GM does NOT want the player to retire, as they will lose them in the sim and/or be hit by a buyout. In this case a more restrictive definition would favor things.

So in general perhaps we need to try to improve further.

I would propose that a player should be considered retired if:
- They announce their retirement (from hockey overall, not just the NHL)
- They are listed as a former or retired player on wikipedia
- They accept an off-ice position within hockey, in management or coaching. Broadcasting excluded from this.
- They have been inactive for 2 straight seasons

A player will NOT be considered retired if
- They file their papers with the NHL only, without a corresponding announcement
- They are playing pro hockey anywhere
- They are listed as an active player on Wikipedia


Thoughts?

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by droopydrew19

I would think If a player sits out a calendar year without even playing in the AHL or Europe they are pretty much retired.

There are multiple cases where players come back from Europe. I cant think of any player ever coming back after sitting out a year.

Problem with the rule being 1 year, is that does that trigger after completion of 1 year, or when the next season starts?

[droopydrew19]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Problem with the rule being 1 year, is that does that trigger after completion of 1 year, or when the next season starts?

If a player does not play the previous season and is not invited to camp on a PTO, I would assume they retired.

[JiriHrdina]

As an aside, based on the above, I think we can consider Brew retired.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

As an aside, based on the above, I think we can consider Brew retired.

agreed,

[Slava]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Yeah this is always tricky and now one policy seems like it ever fully deals with every situation or scenario.
Moreover, in some cases the GM WANTS the player to retire to free up cap space - in which case a more liberal definition would favor things.
However, in some cases the GM does NOT want the player to retire, as they will lose them in the sim and/or be hit by a buyout. In this case a more restrictive definition would favor things.

So in general perhaps we need to try to improve further.

I would propose that a player should be considered retired if:
- They announce their retirement (from hockey overall, not just the NHL)
- They are listed as a former or retired player on wikipedia
- They accept an off-ice position within hockey, in management or coaching. Broadcasting excluded from this.
- They have been inactive for 2 straight seasons

A player will NOT be considered retired if
- They file their papers with the NHL only, without a corresponding announcement
- They are playing pro hockey anywhere
- They are listed as an active player on Wikipedia


Thoughts?

This sounds good to me. Why are we excluding broadcasting? Is that to close the loophole of guys eliminated from the playoffs and appearing as analysts or that sort of thing? (Just curious)

[Swayze11]

Sasha Barkov just retired. Sorry Grant.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Slava

This sounds good to me. Why are we excluding broadcasting? Is that to close the loophole of guys eliminated from the playoffs and appearing as analysts or that sort of thing? (Just curious)

Yup exactly. Particularly those at the end of their careers. It just isn't a strong enough indication that they are done done.