Jimmy Vesey Traded to Sabres for 3rd in 2021

[Doohicksie]

2 hours ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

19 pages on Vesey, man, this offeason so far has been..... Slow. 

That's my thought too.  I'm not sure what we expected.  I still think there will be more significant moves but until training camp starts does it really matter if new pieces are here yet?

[bobs0108]

Or they could do something like the NBA free agency where who ever drafts the player or owns his rights can offer more money or the same pay in minors as the NHL then if they go the free agent route. So if the player really wants to play somewhere else it will cost them money. 

[carpandean]

54 minutes ago, shrader said:

You have to set some arbitrary cutoff point where those rights expire.  That 4 year line from the point of becoming draft eligible has been their standard forever at this point.  If you want to change that, it's a pretty major change that would need to be made across the board.  What would be the corresponding move for the major junior guys, because they're free to sign anywhere after that same timeframe.

I was offering the reduced control window as a trade-off between the teams and the players to make my proposal work.  If you limited the players choices during the window, then it might make sense to reduce the window in exchange.

I guess my point is that -- in my mind -- if the drafting team goes to the max while the player is under control, then they shouldn't lose that player for nothing.  I don't care what route the player took to get there, the same should be true.  If you don't want to force them to accept, which I could understand, then compensatory picks might work.

 

37 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

If the player is 24 or under they are still governed by ELC rules and maximums.

Ah, thanks.  Then, in those cases, at least, I would still like to see something for the team.

[Stoner]

2 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

with respect to @Weave, i think what he's describing is more stirring the pot. I think @Weave called @PASabreFan an iconoclast; I think that's often right, as far as our purposes go around here. I would even go so far as to say that being a provocateur isn't the same as trolling. IMO, there's something gratuitous and disingenuous about internet trolling. If you're engaging in a bit of hyperbole in order to advance an argument that you genuinely believe, then you're not trolling. I don't think there's a single regular poster who's a troll or who trolls.

Thanks. No one here deserves that label. It's the worst thing you can be called online. It's this community's c-word. I'm sure people register here with Dallas Stars handles and make their first post "Good goal!" and are summarily dispatched as true trolls. Fine. pi's opinion on Vesey is reasonable but controversial (and probably more in alignment with the average fan vs. the sophisticates on here). Just disagree and debate. I wish the use of the t-word here, especially when hurled by a moderator, would be buried under Chernobyl.

[Hoss]

5 hours ago, Doohickie said:

I'm not him, but I think of trolling as taking a contrary position just to get a rise out of people.

 

It goes beyond that a wee bit because I don’t think hating Vesey is even contrarian but still think Pi is trolling.

[TrueBlueGED]

1 hour ago, carpandean said:

I was offering the reduced control window as a trade-off between the teams and the players to make my proposal work.  If you limited the players choices during the window, then it might make sense to reduce the window in exchange.

I guess my point is that -- in my mind -- if the drafting team goes to the max while the player is under control, then they shouldn't lose that player for nothing.  I don't care what route the player took to get there, the same should be true.  If you don't want to force them to accept, which I could understand, then compensatory picks might work.

 

Ah, thanks.  Then, in those cases, at least, I would still like to see something for the team.

I would also like to see something for the team, but I don't think forcing the player to sign is the right solution. After all, the player going UFA and walking is a known risk that teams (should) be pricing in. I'm in favor of an NFL style compensatory pick system. 

[Taro T]

7 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I would also like to see something for the team, but I don't think forcing the player to sign is the right solution. After all, the player going UFA and walking is a known risk that teams (should) be pricing in. I'm in favor of an NFL style compensatory pick system. 

So, if you lose 4 FAs but only add 3 you can get an extra pick at the end if the 4th round?  Seems to be an overly complicated way of saying "you will get nothing for that and like it."

[TrueBlueGED]

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

So, if you lose 4 FAs but only add 3 you can get an extra pick at the end if the 4th round?  Seems to be an overly complicated way of saying "you will get nothing for that and like it."

Okay, so maybe I should have left the NFL out of it. My idea is if you draft an NCAA player in the 4th round and they end up not signing with you, you get a 4th round pick in the next draft. Move the player decision deadline up so that it occurs before the draft so there's some immediate compensation. I know it's not perfect because of the timeline on draft pick development, but I think I prefer it to forcing a player to sign. 

[Taro T]

Just now, TrueBlueGED said:

Okay, so maybe I should have left the NFL out of it. My idea is if you draft an NCAA player in the 4th round and they end up not signing with you, you get a 4th round pick in the next draft. Move the player decision deadline up so that it occurs before the draft so there's some immediate compensation. I know it's not perfect because of the timeline on draft pick development, but I think I prefer it to forcing a player to sign. 

So you get compensation if a CHL player goes back into the draft as well?

Do you get extra picks for any guy that doesn't sign or only those that get an offer above a certain threshold?

Totally get the frustration of seeing a guy like Petersen walking away, but just don't see it happen often enough for it to require an additional wrinkle in an already overly complex set of rules. YMMV.

And, what sort of carve out is there for guys in Will Butcher's scenario where the NHL club pretty much ignored him for years until the last year of his deal when he suddenly "got it.". The Avs got exactly what they'd wrought.

[shrader]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

So you get compensation if a CHL player goes back into the draft as well?

Do you get extra picks for any guy that doesn't sign or only those that get an offer above a certain threshold?

Totally get the frustration of seeing a guy like Petersen walking away, but just don't see it happen often enough for it to require an additional wrinkle in an already overly complex set of rules. YMMV.

And, what sort of carve out is there for guys in Will Butcher's scenario where the NHL club pretty much ignored him for years until the last year of his deal when he suddenly "got it.". The Avs got exactly what they'd wrought.

Did the league ever give a reason for eliminating their system of compensatory picks back during the 2004-05 lockout?  I don't remember ever actually seeing anything about that.

But yes, I'm completely with you on all of this.  Comping the lost college picks opens the door to so many other options that would need to be considered.  As we're doing right now, we'll be unhappy with whatever winds up being the new scenario where teams get nothing, and all because of one fairly rare occurrence.  We'll just continue to move the goal posts.  I don't see any need for change here.

[TrueBlueGED]

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

So you get compensation if a CHL player goes back into the draft as well?

Do you get extra picks for any guy that doesn't sign or only those that get an offer above a certain threshold?

Totally get the frustration of seeing a guy like Petersen walking away, but just don't see it happen often enough for it to require an additional wrinkle in an already overly complex set of rules. YMMV.

And, what sort of carve out is there for guys in Will Butcher's scenario where the NHL club pretty much ignored him for years until the last year of his deal when he suddenly "got it.". The Avs got exactly what they'd wrought.

You get an equivalent round pick if you offer a max ELC and the player elects UFA. That's it. I don't think it's overly complicated at all. 

And to be clear, I'd prefer no changes at all. I was merely presenting an alternative option to Carp wanting to force a player to sign. 

[shrader]

4 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

You get an equivalent round pick if you offer a max ELC and the player elects UFA. That's it. I don't think it's overly complicated at all. 

And to be clear, I'd prefer no changes at all. I was merely presenting an alternative option to Carp wanting to force a player to sign. 

They currently give you a second round pick if you lose your first round pick, so they'd probably have to do the same thing in this proposed system, one round later than what was lost.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

You get an equivalent round pick if you offer a max ELC and the player elects UFA. That's it. I don't think it's overly complicated at all. 

And to be clear, I'd prefer no changes at all. I was merely presenting an alternative option to Carp wanting to force a player to sign. 

And for the 1 time it happens every 2-3 seasons, it seems to be adding unnecessary complexity to fix a problem that isn't really a problem.

(Realizing you aren't arguing for it, but merely suggesting if as a possible option.)

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

It seems to be happening more than it used to and as more good players take the NCAA route I think it's going to be a growing issue in the future.

Wouldn't doubt there are others, but Vesey, Petersen, & Butcher (who was a special case, as he originally was ecstatic to have been drafted by by Colorado) are the only 3 that immediately spring to mind.

Buffalo being involved in 2 of those situations likely makes it seem more prevalent than it is.

[shrader]

Just now, Let's Go B-Lo said:

It seems to be happening more than it used to and as more good players take the NCAA route I think it's going to be a growing issue in the future.

Is it though?  It's tough to quantify this one because google isn't really helping me on this one.  We're aware of it since it hit us twice recently, but only one of those was really ours since we were dumb enough to trade for one who already said he was going that route.  So we've had 1 draft pick out of the 15 post-lockout drafts go this route (granted its too early for a handful of those drafts).  That's not looking all that common.  As taro has said, it's what, 2-3 per year leaguewide?

[shrader]

4 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Kevin Hayes, Alex Kerfoot, Justin Schultz...  Zach Hyman forced a trade...

I'm comparing to the past when it would never happen at all.  Now it has happened more than a handful of times in recent years and each time it has happened it was with a player who was pretty good.  I said in an earlier post, it's going to take a big prospect spurning a team like the Leafs or Canadiens for this to get traction.

But were we paying attention in some of those earlier years to see whether or not this was happening?  Blake Wheeler did all the way back in 2008, but I'm guessing many aren't even aware of it.  They were also operating under different rules in the past, specifically the so called Van Ryn loophole, which they closed in that 2004-05 lockout.  As I said earlier in the thread, this current practice was planned for and is specifically addressed in the CBA.  The teams may not be crazy about it, but there needs to be some level of leeway given to the players.  If you want to take that away, ok, but be prepared for even worse fallout than 2004-05.

[Taro T]

4 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Kevin Hayes, Alex Kerfoot, Justin Schultz...

I'm comparing to the past when it would never happen at all.  Now it has happened more than a handful of times in recent years and each time it has happened it was with a player who was pretty good.  I said in an earlier post, it's going to take a big prospect spurning a team like the Leafs or Canadiens for this to get traction.

Kevin Hayes was drafted in the 1st round of '10.  Why didn't Chicago push harder to sign him in '11 or '12?

Vesey was 3rd round of '12 (and his story is well known).  Kerfoot 5th round that year.

Schulz was a 2nd rounder in '08 out of a lower tier Canadian junior league (BCHL) and only spent 3 years at Wisconsin.  His situation wouldn't likely fit any remediation that gets proposed here at any rate.  And the Ducks should've pursued him more aggressively after his freshman year.

And Cal Petersen was known / suspected to be planning on going FA 2 years before be did and Butcher has also been well discussed from '13.  Both teams kind of were accidentally complicit in their coming away with nothing.

So, 6 guys that walked since '12.  1 of which can still likely be 'meh ' (Petersen). And 1 1st rounder, and 1 2nd rounder that teams should be expected to do a better job of pursuing.

YMMV, but just not seeing this as a huge problem needing addressing.

[pi2000]

48 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Kevin Hayes was drafted in the 1st round of '10.  Why didn't Chicago push harder to sign him in '11 or '12?

Vesey was 3rd round of '12 (and his story is well known).  Kerfoot 5th round that year.

Schulz was a 2nd rounder in '08 out of a lower tier Canadian junior league (BCHL) and only spent 3 years at Wisconsin.  His situation wouldn't likely fit any remediation that gets proposed here at any rate.  And the Ducks should've pursued him more aggressively after his freshman year.

And Cal Petersen was known / suspected to be planning on going FA 2 years before be did and Butcher has also been well discussed from '13.  Both teams kind of were accidentally complicit in their coming away with nothing.

So, 6 guys that walked since '12.  1 of which can still likely be 'meh ' (Petersen). And 1 1st rounder, and 1 2nd rounder that teams should be expected to do a better job of pursuing.

YMMV, but just not seeing this as a huge problem needing addressing.

....because it's severely frowned upon in NHL circles.    It's a slap in the face to the team that drafted you and invested resources in your development.... film study, private coaches, dev camps, diet experts, etc, etc.

Maybe I'm old school, but IMO those kids are dis-respecting the process.    

If Vesey wanted to play for the NYR, then he can do that.... when he hits UFA status at 27.

NSH tried to sign Vesey on several occasions before his senior year.. but he said he wanted to finish school and see if they could win a championship, and that he would sign immediately after (which was after the trade deadline btw).     He lied.   

[#freejame]

Let’s not forget these kids are risking their professional livelihoods to reach UFA status. I would guess that’s the biggest reason most don’t pursue it. 

[darksabre]

2 hours ago, pi2000 said:

....because it's severely frowned upon in NHL circles.    It's a slap in the face to the team that drafted you and invested resources in your development.... film study, private coaches, dev camps, diet experts, etc, etc.

Maybe I'm old school, but IMO those kids are dis-respecting the process.    

If Vesey wanted to play for the NYR, then he can do that.... when he hits UFA status at 27.

NSH tried to sign Vesey on several occasions before his senior year.. but he said he wanted to finish school and see if they could win a championship, and that he would sign immediately after (which was after the trade deadline btw).     He lied.   

I love when people couch their bad takes with this one. It's got nothing to do with being old school. You're just a dork.

[SDS]

2 hours ago, pi2000 said:

....because it's severely frowned upon in NHL circles.    It's a slap in the face to the team that drafted you and invested resources in your development.... film study, private coaches, dev camps, diet experts, etc, etc.

Maybe I'm old school, but IMO those kids are dis-respecting the process.    

If Vesey wanted to play for the NYR, then he can do that.... when he hits UFA status at 27.

NSH tried to sign Vesey on several occasions before his senior year.. but he said he wanted to finish school and see if they could win a championship, and that he would sign immediately after (which was after the trade deadline btw).     He lied.   

Provide evidence that it is frowned upon.

[Taro T]

11 minutes ago, darksabre said:

I love when people couch their bad takes with this one. It's got nothing to do with being old school. You're just a dork.

He says while using a put down that was old school back in PA's day.  Awesome! :lol:

[darksabre]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

He says while using a put down that was old school back in PA's day.  Awesome! :lol:

I'm just trying not to be super mean!

[tom webster]

If players should be forced to sign with team that drafted them shouldn’t teams be forced to sign every one it drafts?

[pi2000]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

If players should be forced to sign with team that drafted them shouldn’t teams be forced to sign every one it drafts?

No.

Make then RFAs if they don't sign.