Grigo a no-go for Roch - Adam & McNabb called up

[Trettioåtta]

I would have wanted to watch him play in the AHL too, but saying "they took a shot and missed" doesn't really describe the situation. Maybe we should take a shot and try to put Leino on IR without injury to save cap space. Or take a shot and just carry a 25 man roster for the rest of the season. Hell, let's throw Miller and Enroth in the net at the same time from now on. Maybe the NHL won't notice.

 

I'm not trying to make this a bigger deal than it is, so I'll stop posting about it now. But the argument that they expected it would be denied but hoped the NHL would let it slide seems absurd.

 

I think your missing the point. Those rules all have very clear conditions - has a doctor signed off saying you are injured, you are only allowed 23 men on a roster and you are only allowed one goalie on the ice. Whereas conditioning is really wish washy. There will be a spectrum of fitness in the league and so there is no standard by which you can say this player is unfit enough to need the minors. Not to mention, Grigo sitting out a fair few games recently (and the season as a whole) gives you the argument he is not match fit - again, what match fit means is irrelevant, as each player assigns his own meaning to it. Plus effort on the ice (in a game) also comes into fitness, which further muddies the whole issue.

 

tl;dr - there was an arguable, although transparent, case to get Grigo into the A. There is not an argument in the examples you provided

[Taro T]

I would have wanted to watch him play in the AHL too, but saying "they took a shot and missed" doesn't really describe the situation. Maybe we should take a shot and try to put Leino on IR without injury to save cap space. Or take a shot and just carry a 25 man roster for the rest of the season. Hell, let's throw Miller and Enroth in the net at the same time from now on. Maybe the NHL won't notice.

 

I'm not trying to make this a bigger deal than it is, so I'll stop posting about it now. But the argument that they expected it would be denied but hoped the NHL would let it slide seems absurd.

Sure it does. The rule states that players can be sent to the AHL for conditioning assignments. I haven't seen the new cba, but it wasn't too elaborate in the old one. There was a reasonable, though not great, possibility the plan would have worked.

 

Your other examples are of activities that are clearly prohibited under either cba or playing rules. A better example was of DR not taking a chance on waiting until the playoffs to activate TC from LTIR and possibly not being able to use him in the playoffs and using his cap space on another vet that could have helped the playoff run. What PLF &TN did was essentially take the chance on stashing TC. It didn't work, but I like that they're interpreting gray areas in a manner favorable to the Sabres until told otherwise. The previous management went the other way when it was gray. Too risky (and unfortunately then too many opportunities lost).

[Formerly Allan in MD]

putting aside all the discussion of where Grigorenko should play, how embarrassing is this from an organizational standpoint? the fact that Grigorenko won't play in the AHL isn't a big deal to me, but wow, the Sabres don't even know/understand the rules about this kind of thing? Fantastic.

 

I laughed when someone linked to this post in another thread on the topic -- perhaps Darcy Kevin & Pat should take a look.

Not surprising. They don't have a GM.

[inkman]

The mods at TBD have a tendency to either change the title of your thread or request that you change it.

Only of your some kind of ###### tard that doesn't know how to title a thread. I've been here what 7-8 years? Not once has a mod had to tell me to re-name a thread.

[North Buffalo]

Not surprising. They don't have a GM.

 

I too disagree. You can't get a ruled defined unless you ask. As stated above, there are some legitimate arguments to send Grigs to the AHL, though wishy washy, it is worth a shot. So what about getting embarrassed, if it works then it great attempt. If not it makes clear to other teams they can't do it either. The embarrassment was that Grigs was put in limbo by the previous administration. Though that may have happened inevitably because he is too good for the juniors and not quite ready for the NHL. If Europe is a possibility, I can't see why that would hurt him.

 

?Anyway Grigs could be sent to the WHL or traded there and would that be any better than the QMHL, OR the OHL?

[Norcal]

So Grigorenko comes back to Buffalo. Why not play him? Put him on the ice in all situations and ask him to do all the hard work. Give him top six minutes and 10 games to start producing and if he doesn't then he's a healthy scratch or he goes to the Q to finish the year. The kid hasn't been given a fair shot to date imo and the Sabres have nothing to lose this year atleast. Excited to see what Adam and McNabb bring, they deserve a shot!!

[Miller30]

It's just a simple case of "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission" No harm no foul. It was a good try.

[nfreeman]

They didn't try to use a loophole. They just tried to liberally apply the rule in an unsubtle manner. It isn't really embarrassing to the organisation imo as they weren't caught breaking any rules. I'm not shocked it was rejected and i doubt they are, but it was worth ago - had it worked we would probably be praising Pat for taking the initiative to get Grigo into the A.

 

It isn't particularly clever or subtle, i'm sure DR knew it was an option but thought it wasn't worth the 'risk'

I'm w/ you. It was an aggressive and creative attempt to solve a problem. We'd applaud it in any other organization.

It's just a simple case of "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission" No harm no foul. It was a good try.

 

I agree with all of these.

[Mike Oxhurtz]

 

Only of your some kind of ###### tard that doesn't know how to title a thread. I've been here what 7-8 years? Not once has a mod had to tell me to re-name a thread.

 

I've seen numerous times from mods on TBD telling other posters to rename a thread which weren't derogatory or even sarcastic.

[inkman]

I've seen numerous times from mods on TBD telling other posters to rename a thread which weren't derogatory or even sarcastic.

Perhaps I'm going out on a limb here but I think the mods are trying to keep poster from titling threads inappropriately with ambiguous titles or portly worded threads. Just thinking out loud here. I think that's what makes this place special. You don't get the "Sabres Suck Balls" thread titles because we are looking for stimulating discussion not condescending, poorly worded diatribes telling everyone why they are right and everyone else is wrong. (Not that I'm thinkin of a particular poster here ;))

[Eleven]

Perhaps I'm going out on a limb here but I think the mods are trying to keep poster from titling threads inappropriately with ambiguous titles or portly worded threads. Just thinking out loud here. I think that's what makes this place special. You don't get the "Sabres Suck Balls" thread titles because we are looking for stimulating discussion not condescending, poorly worded diatribes telling everyone why they are right and everyone else is wrong. (Not that I'm thinkin of a particular poster here ;))

 

TBD has thread titles like: "I'm thinking the Bills should." Then you click. Then you read that it's about parking policies or signing Tim Tebow. Then you feel sad.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I'm with the buff guy on this one.

 

Patty tried to pull a fast one to sneak Grigs to the A. He may have thought his buddy at the league offices would give him his one freebee.

 

I am not sure of the exact wording in the old, or new, CBA on the conditioning stints, but I do not recall a case in the past that a player was not coming back from injury when they were sent to the A for a conditioning stint. If not the text that was the spirit of the clause and the precedent had long been set.

[LGR4GM]

Really? We are really arguing over this? They tried to send him the couldn't. I no longer care.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

It's not an *argument*, it's a discussion. Big difference. No one is using a loud voice.

 

And if you no longer care, no need to add to that discussion.

[billsrcursed]

TBD has thread titles like: "I'm thinking the Bills should." Then you click. Then you read that it's about parking policies or signing Tim Tebow. Then you feel sad.

 

Exactly this.

 

When I come here, I expect to learn.

 

When I go there, not so much.

 

There is a great core of posters that I do look forward to hearing from over there, you just have to thumb through the mud sometimes to get to them.

[LGR4GM]

It's not an *argument*, it's a discussion. Big difference. No one is using a loud voice.

 

And if you no longer care, no need to add to that discussion.

Yea arguing does not mean loud yelling.

 

And I am adding to the discussion. I think it is pointless :flirt:

[apuszczalowski]

TBD has thread titles like: "I'm thinking the Bills should." Then you click. Then you read that it's about parking policies or signing Tim Tebow. Then you feel sad.

Yup, nothing to do with derogatory or use of language in the title, just clarification as to what its about. They want the thread titles to be clear so that you know what the topic is about before even having to click and read the post