Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Leagues and Games > Calgarypuck Hockey League

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-22-2020, 03:50 PM   #61
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Because he's on LTIR, same as Steen
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Old 12-22-2020, 04:26 PM   #62
Hanna Sniper
Franchise Player
 
Hanna Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
I think this season is an anomaly but I think during our off-season we should consider if we can update how we handle to better align to the realities of what's happening in the NHL.
I see two paths
- We keep the current approach, which is if the player is on LTIR they aren't retired, but they get hit hard in re-rates. This benefits GMs in some cases (they can continue to use a player this year) but it also hurts GMs in others (e.g. GMs have to keep a non retired player on their roster using up cap space - Colin Wilson, Dustin Byfuglien (bit of a different situation), etc)
- We become more liberal in our definition of retirement and if a player communicates they aren't playing any more, or accepts an off-ice position - we consider them done.

This has been a moving target and we are doing the best to be consistent in how we apply the rule. But I think it's time to figure out how to evolve it given the NHL behaviours in play. To me that's a call we can align on in the off-season.
We have rules about signing NHL vets to UFA contracts, that if they retire then we are penalized. But we are using a standard for players that were nothing like this, whose career was cut short and unclear. Today was the first time I've ever heard that player saying they are done is not considered retired. if a player still has a term on his contract yet retires, we have never gone with the contract before. So the rules are being changed as we go to adjust to the situations (a good thing IMO) but those situations by all means aren't the standard now of how we have always done things. How we have always did things was deal with the situation as it happened

the article on Steen very obviously states that he's done in the NHL, calling it a career. Do we think that Boychuck or Steen will ever play another game? Because if we do then it's understandable to do the wait and see.

We created rules and makes teams reconsider signing player that could very likely retire. Now we are trying very hard to not acknowledge and enforce them. That was part of the game of sending in offers on players, do you take the risk to send an offer in or not.

Isn't losing these players from rosters a good thing? That creating holes and making GM's fill those positions help the league be more active. By putting penalties on signing UFA adds a risk factor. I thought this was part of the game and am confused why I'm a bad guy for thinking its a good thing

I'm lost
__________________
- Say No to Vertical Video -
Hanna Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2020, 04:43 PM   #63
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

In the past we had similar situations with Pronger, Horton and Savard and from what we recall we kept them active in the league. So we are simply trying to apply that precedent.
I'm not saying that's right. Again this has been changing as there are more examples now of players retiring but not OFFICIALLY retiring, but instead moving to LTIR to continue to collect a pay check. So we need to probably change our approach given that reality.
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2020, 05:55 PM   #64
Hanna Sniper
Franchise Player
 
Hanna Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Exp:
Default

I really need to stop speaking up about things like this
__________________
- Say No to Vertical Video -
Hanna Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hanna Sniper For This Useful Post:
Old 12-30-2020, 10:34 AM   #65
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Exp:
Default

Ryan Callahan retires
https://www.tsn.ca/former-tampa-bay-...ires-1.1570488
__________________
Flames Draft Rankings 2013-2020
Cheese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2021, 01:43 PM   #66
TheScorpion
First round-bust
 
TheScorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: hiding from the thread police
Exp:
Default

I think this might have been missed but it looks like Colin Wilson has retired:

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2045563
__________________
Flames and Coyotes columns + Heat coverage. On video for Icethetics.
TheScorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2021, 02:20 PM   #67
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion View Post
I think this might have been missed but it looks like Colin Wilson has retired:

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2045563
Article says heís probably done
Not definitive
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2021, 11:01 AM   #68
TheScorpion
First round-bust
 
TheScorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: hiding from the thread police
Exp:
Default

Well it appears to be definitive now:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1346486911079227395
__________________
Flames and Coyotes columns + Heat coverage. On video for Icethetics.
TheScorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2021, 12:08 PM   #69
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Exp:
Default

Weird. Ive watched his father get drafted, play a career, then his son and live to tell about it. Wonder if Carey has a grandson playing?
__________________
Flames Draft Rankings 2013-2020
Cheese is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cheese For This Useful Post:
Old 01-05-2021, 01:13 PM   #70
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Yup he's dun.
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2021, 11:34 AM   #71
Goffie
Franchise Player
 
Goffie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Exp:
Default

Wow...Crawford retires.

https://twitter.com/nhlpa/status/134...587372033?s=21
__________________


Goffie is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Goffie For This Useful Post:
Old 01-09-2021, 12:46 PM   #72
Hanna Sniper
Franchise Player
 
Hanna Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goffie View Post
This should be interesting, find out if rules are selective or equal

For the record, they all should be retired. Crawford and the others
__________________
- Say No to Vertical Video -
Hanna Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2021, 12:53 PM   #73
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Doug I've explained in a very transparent way why the rule has become difficult to apply, and acknowledged we should probably evolve it, and that we've tried to be consistent in how we apply in what has been a fluid situation, particularly this off-season.
You can disagree and I'm open to thoughts from all GMs on how they think we should handle. Perhaps we should vote on that. I'm open to all that. Perhaps we should simply vote on each player when this comes up and let the league Gms collectively decide.

What I don't appreciate is when you suggest that we are selective with application of our rules as that implies that we not being fair in how we manage this league.

If that's not what you are saying then please clarify.
If it is - and that represents how you feel then at some point you should consider leaving the league.

I work VERY hard to be fair and transparent with this league. If you don't think that's the case, then why continue to play a game that you don't believe is being fairly managed.

Again you can clarify what you are saying but when you say will be "interesting to see if the rules are selective" that's what it implies to me. And I take issue with that.
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Old 01-09-2021, 01:00 PM   #74
MJK
Franchise Player
 
MJK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: N/A
Exp:
Default

Deep breath everyone.

I believe this is still a bit of a grey area in our league when it should be black and white.

Both sides have legit points. I think there is a simple solution here if we just take a step back and think about it for a moment.

Any legit retirement news whether actually retired or riding out on IR, than they are retired. In the event that player actually comes back, the team that had said player gets first right of refusal.

Is it that simple?

If so, some GMs are happy to rid themselves of a plug and some are upset because they lose a key player. BUT if we decide that it’s the GM discretion to retire player immediately or end of CPHL season it should work.

Not a rule change, it’s a rule modification.

Last edited by MJK; 01-09-2021 at 01:05 PM.
MJK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2021, 01:02 PM   #75
agulati
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

The voting methodology is fair IMO. I did get burnt by this with Byfuglien, but thanks Scorp for taking him on and Jiri for helping me out too.

I agree with Jiri that it is tough to apply the same rule to every retirement because we have seen many players “retire” or go on long term injury etc and then come back and play (Williams, Niedermayer etc) or players constantly in the lurch (Byfuglien) Maybe we can do that if they miss a whole season, it is a different situation? They will probably get a playable rating for the first year, in any case.
agulati is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to agulati For This Useful Post:
Old 01-09-2021, 01:05 PM   #76
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJK View Post
Deep breath everyone.

Both sides have legit points. I think there is a simple solution here if we just take a step back and think about it for a moment.

Any legit retirement news whether actually retired or riding out on IR, than they are retired. In the event that player actually comes back, the team that had said player gets first right of refusal.

Is it that simple?

Not a rule change, itís a rule modification.
There are legit points. As mentioned, we should be able to discuss and debate these issues.
But what we shouldn't do is start to assume bad intent...such as the league being "selective with rules".
I am 100% fine having this discussion and as a group settling on how we should handle. I'm not fine with suggestions that we are not managing this league fairly.
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2021, 01:09 PM   #77
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

I think part of the issue is the buyout which was intended to provide some caution to signing UFAs long-term.
But the penalty of losing a player is perhaps enough.

So in my head the best rule is perhaps something like this

- If a player announces their retirement, the league GMs will vote on if they are retired in the CPHL or not. The Gm of that player cannot vote, and 51% or more is required to carry the vote
- Players that announce their retirement at the end of the NHL season, will be allowed to complete their CPHL season in all cases
- We will eliminate the buyout penalty

Something like that. Much like we've done with the approval of new GM trades, I'd rather put the decision in the hands of the league, as opposed to the commissioners to democratize it and avoid any perception of unfairness.

If we moved in this direction we'd have to decide if we do it:
- Immediately
- Immediately and retroactively to include all players since our season started
- After this season

Again that's my lean. Open to thoughts.
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2021, 01:09 PM   #78
MJK
Franchise Player
 
MJK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: N/A
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
There are legit points. As mentioned, we should be able to discuss and debate these issues.
But what we shouldn't do is start to assume bad intent...such as the league being "selective with rules".
I am 100% fine having this discussion and as a group settling on how we should handle. I'm not fine with suggestions that we are not managing this league fairly.
I believe there was a thread on this already where it was discussed but outcome unclear. I chose not to participate because I really donít care either way. But some people do care and itís best to find a solution.

Are we are a debate stage or a vote stage?

Iím good with either but it is something that needs to be resolved.
MJK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2021, 01:12 PM   #79
MJK
Franchise Player
 
MJK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: N/A
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by agulati View Post
The voting methodology is fair IMO. I did get burnt by this with Byfuglien, but thanks Scorp for taking him on and Jiri for helping me out too.

I agree with Jiri that it is tough to apply the same rule to every retirement because we have seen many players “retire” or go on long term injury etc and then come back and play (Williams, Niedermayer etc) or players constantly in the lurch (Byfuglien) Maybe we can do that if they miss a whole season, it is a different situation? They will probably get a playable rating for the first year, in any case.
So if they all are retired and the team that player was on gets first right of refusal, doesn’t that solve our problem?

I don’t see this as being any different than when I lost Kovalchuk to the KHL. I was mad. BUT the league decided I had first right of refusal when he returned to the NHL. Every GM bid on him and I either matched it or I didn’t.

This can be the same thing.
MJK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2021, 01:13 PM   #80
Jiri Hrdina
George!
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJK View Post
I believe there was a thread on this already where it was discussed but outcome unclear. I chose not to participate because I really donít care either way. But some people do care and itís best to find a solution.

Are we are a debate stage or a vote stage?

Iím good with either but it is something that needs to be resolved.
The outcome of the previous discussion was that we would continue to apply the rules as we have been. However, as this seems to be a growing issue, including due to dynamics being created by COVID, I'm open to making an immediate change.

So right now we are probably at the debate stage - where folks are welcome to put forth other ideas, in addition to what I've suggested. We then vote on which one we go with, and probably then vote on when we apply (again options being immediate, immediate and retroactive, or in the off-season).

So if there are other proposed ideas on how to handle they should be put forth as candidates.

I'm a fan of the vote because the term "retire" which was once very clear has become less clear. It now can mean a player is totally done, done but on IR, or "taking a break".
Jiri Hrdina is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:27 AM.

Calgary Flames
2019-20




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021