Claimed off Waivers: [CBJ] Blue Jackets claim D Dante Fabbro off waivers from the Predators

[Pinkfloyd]

But those players can't be traded when placed on waivers, right? Honestly no idea how this all works.

Players can be traded if offered to those that claimed him when on waivers but I don’t know if there are deadlines involved.

 

[HolyGhost]

This is the GM sending a message to the players

 

[VeteranPresence]

This is the GM sending a message to the players

That he’s an idiot?

 

[Ciao]

It’s reverse order of the standings in the previous year’s November 1st.

So based on this I believe it would be Sharks, Ducks, Canadiens, Blackhawks, Predators (who obviously passed), and Flyers.

That doesn't sound right.

Isn't it the reverse order of standings at the end of last season until November 1st, and then the current reverse order of standings after that?

PS. Okay , you've edited your post with the right teams.

 

[Breakers]

That doesn't sound right.

Isn't it the reverse order of standings at the end of last season until November 1st, and then the current reverse order of standings after that?

PS. Okay , you've edited your post with the right teams.

I’ve read like 4 different idea on the order

I have no idea but am really curious on the official teams that passed

 

[Soundgarden]

I guess we have cap space now, I'm sure we'll pick up another 35 year old at the deadline for one of our 1sts.

 

[JoeSakic13]

I’ve read like 4 different idea on the order

I have no idea but am really curious on the official teams that passed

Yeah I kept reading different things as I was looking. One thing is for sure though, he didn’t get passed on by many teams.

 

[Ciao]

I’ve read like 4 different idea on the order

I have no idea but am really curious on the official teams that passed

At this point, just reverse order of standings, by winning percentage.

Looks like the Sharks, Habs, Ducks, Blackhawks, and Flyers. Maybe the Kraken and Penguins, too, before the Blue Jackets?

 

[Lucas Hood]

I guess we have cap space now, I'm sure we'll pick up another 35 year old at the deadline for one of our 1sts.

Don't you dare sell Matt Martin and his generational locker room dynamics short

 

[CanadienShark]

Players can be traded if offered to those that claimed him when on waivers but I don’t know if there are deadlines involved.

Interesting... So could for example Edmonton have traded for him if they put a claim in, before Columbus got him? Or am I misunderstanding?

 

[JoeSakic13]

At this point, just reverse order of standings, by winning percentage.

Looks like Sharks, Habs, Ducks, Blackhawks, and Flyers. Maybe the Kraken, too, before the Blue Jackets?

If that’s the correct order I believe Canadiens would have passed too.

 

[Breakers]

Looking at depth

Montreal makes no sense
Savard and Hutson as a pairing is like mixing oil and water

And they continue to roll with that pairing

 

[Ciao]

Interesting... So could for example Edmonton have traded for him if they put a claim in, before Columbus got him? Or am I misunderstanding?

You're misunderstanding. A trade won't stop a waivers claim.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Interesting... So could for example Edmonton have traded for him if they put a claim in, before Columbus got him? Or am I misunderstanding?

I believe that if teams past Columbus on the waiver priority list put a claim on Fabbro like say Boston, they have to be offered the player on waivers first before he can be traded elsewhere.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Tbh it makes sense why the 5 teams that had claim priority over cbj didn't do so. At the deadline cbj could very well have another trade chip.

Only if on other teams after CBJ put claims on him, or if they did, if they didn't want him for free at the deadline.

 

[Viqsi]

Waiver claim order is covered in section 13.19 of the CBA (page 81 here).

If only one Club makes a claim for the Player on whom Waivers have been requested, such Player shall be transferred to that Club.
In the event that more than one Club makes a claim for such Player, he shall:
(i) be transferred to the claiming Club having earned the lowest percentage of possible points in the League standing at the time of the request for Waivers, OR
(ii) if Waivers are requested outside the Regular Season, or the successful Waiver claim is made (i.e., the date the Player would be transferred to a successful claiming Club per this Section), before November 1st then the priority shall be determined by the final standing in the League's Regular Season schedule in the preceding Regular Season.

In the event that two (2) or more claiming Clubs in (i) above have the same percentage of possible points in the League standing at the time of the Waiver claim, the Player will be transferred to the claiming Club
(1) with the lowest winning percentage at the time of the request for Waivers (excluding games won in the Shootout);
(2) if there are claiming Clubs that remain tied following (1), then to the Club (of such remaining Clubs) that has earned the fewest number of points in games against each other (to be determined consistent with the procedures used to determine the final League standings, particularly the manner in which "odd games" are eliminated from the analysis); and
(3) if there are claiming Clubs that remain tied following (2), then to the Club (of such remaining Clubs) with the lowest differential between goals for and goals against as determined on a per game basis from National Hockey League official statistics used for purposes of determining League standings (i.e., the difference obtained by subtracting the Club's total goals against from the Club's total goals for is divided by the number of games played by the Club).

These tie-breaking procedures are subject to change consistent with any change adopted to the League's tie-breaking procedures for determining League standings, however, for purposes of this provision any steps in such updated procedures shall be calculated and/or applied on a per game basis where possible (e.g., winning percentage as opposed to wins and goal differential on a per game basis as opposed to goal differential).

The short version is that since it's after November 1, the priority order would have been reverse points percentage (with tiebreakers as described above) as of yesterday, before the games that were played that evening. Figuring that out exactly is going to be a bit of a bitch since twelve games were played yesterday and I can't find a site that'll give Standings As Of $DATE.

EDIT: I am a total fool. nhl.com will give standings in that fashion; I just never noticed that functionality before

EDIT #2: Bonus foolishness; the standings I was looking at were after the games on the 9th took place. So I've deleted that. See four posts down.

 

[Viqsi]

No it’s by points and then tie breakers come in.

The column after the % is regulation wins.
View attachment 928932

Tie Breakers:
CBJ have played fewer games/better point % than PHI.

NSH “wins” the NSH vs CHI tie breaker because they beat CHI already.

MTL has more regulation wins than SJS.

View attachment 928926

The order procedure for waivers is subtly different. You start at points percentage, rather than using it as the first tiebreaker.

 

[MikeK]

WTF!? What the heck happened here.

 

[Mattb124]

I'm not sure our existing players help our prospects either.

If the Sharks claimed Fabbro, Thompson would have been sent down to the NHL. Not a good message for a GM to send when he has been playing well, especially when the likes of Gushchin, Bordeleau, and Cardwell’s opportunity for playing time this season have been diminished by bringing in the likes of Wennberg, Dellandria, and Grundstrom.

 

[Viqsi]

Meanwhile, ugh. If you look at nhl.com's standings as of today, then look at them as of yesterday, they're identical. So I shouldn't have trusted them to begin with. I should have checked the Jackets' record on what they displayed to be sure.

If I push it back another day to exclude yesterday's games, the list of teams gets, um, a LOT longer:

The text of the CBA says it's the standings "at the time of the request for Waivers", thus my desire to exclude yesterday's games - they hadn't been played yet. But if that's true, then regardless of the actual order (there's a lot of tiebreakers there to consider), it would seem the pissed off Oil fans have a legit grudge.

 

[CanadienShark]

You're misunderstanding. A trade won't stop a waivers claim.

That's what I thought originally. The trade aspect confused me when I heard of it. I originally assumed trades simply aren't possible once placed on waivers, until the claim is made or the player clears.

I believe that if teams past Columbus on the waiver priority list put a claim on Fabbro like say Boston, they have to be offered the player on waivers first before he can be traded elsewhere.

Interesting... Hard to wrap my head around now. Confusing, but I'm sure there's rationale.

 

[Viqsi]

Okay, I'm going full OCD mode. "at the time of the request for Waivers" means no yesterday games, so we get to figure that half the League or so passed on him.

Exact order, by points percentage unless noted otherwise:
San Jose
Montreal
Chicago
Anaheim
Philadelphia
Colorado
Seattle
Pittsburgh
Ottawa
Buffalo (over Edmonton by goal-differential tiebreaker)
Edmonton
NYI (over the other four due to two shootout wins being excluded by tiebreaker; they also lost head-to-heads to everyone except Boston)
Boston
St. Louis
Detroit
Columbus

 

[Dead Coyote]

He's not a Jiricek replacement, so the only likely outcome is even more fan disappointment.

If it was me doing the lineups, I'd slot him next to Werenski and hope/presume the magic can be rediscovered from when he was a wonderful stay-at-home guy alongside Josi. The risk, of course, is that that was like three years ago. But given how much cap space we have, the term on his contract, and how big the potential payoff is, it's so incredibly worth trying.

Big fan of this for my fantasy sim league. You should be happy with this for sure. He's a great partner for Werenski, but we'll see about that. I thought Harris would be pretty good with him too. But all the same, he should easily be a top 4 d-man with much needed steadiness.

 

[CanadienShark]

If the Sharks claimed Fabbro, Thompson would have been sent down to the NHL. Not a good message for a GM to send when he has been playing well, especially when the likes of Gushchin, Bordeleau, and Cardwell’s opportunity for playing time this season have been diminished by bringing in the likes of Wennberg, Dellandria, and Grundstrom.

I don't know... I'd rather the message be: were trying to win, so help us win. Worst case scenario, we send down Fabbro if he can't beat Thompson. I don't think trotting out the likes of Rutta really sends a good message either.

 

[uncleben]

For those interested, this cost Columbus $15,000, paid to Nashville and not counted against the cap.



Total number of claims: 11
Total compensation: $402,750