The Devils vs. The waiver wire
- Thread starter McJags
- Start date
Not being a + player on terrible Albany teams is not a huge deal for me, he had one of the better +/- on the team for the last couple years. I think the issue is Urbom is the only physical young D we have that could potentially slot in if Sal or Volchenkov get hurt. Harrold fills more of a puck moving position and we'd have Gelinas, Merrill, etc that could come for that.
My opinion, I guess we'll find out soon enough what the plan is.
Gionta's a 20 point 4th line center who most GMs probably think is a good 2-way player because he does all the usual forechecking/hitting/gritty stuff well. I definitely won't say he'll get picked up for sure (I remember being sure that Zharkov wouldn't clear 
), but he got a reputation pretty quickly and I wouldn't be surprised to see some team take a shot on him, especially for free.
), but he got a reputation pretty quickly and I wouldn't be surprised to see some team take a shot on him, especially for free.
billingtons ghost
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2010
- 10,541
- 7,800
Here are the waiver rules:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHL_salary_cap#Exemptions
Urbom signed his ELC at 19, so he is waiver exempt based upon the fact he has to be 4 years in the NHL, and his 'first' season has to consist of playing 11 games in the NHL. He hasn't done that yet.
Tedenby has to clear waivers because he played 58 games in 2010 when he signed his first contract when he was 20, so the clock has started on his 'seasons' and this would be his fourth.
I think Yayo has to clear because he signed when he was 19, and played 28 games in 2010, so that's his first year - which makes this his 4th.
Edit - someone could check my logic on the above, but I think I'm right...
For what it's worth - I think Gelinas starts the year in the AHL until someone gets dinged. Urbom starts there too, because he doesn't have to clear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHL_salary_cap#Exemptions
Urbom signed his ELC at 19, so he is waiver exempt based upon the fact he has to be 4 years in the NHL, and his 'first' season has to consist of playing 11 games in the NHL. He hasn't done that yet.
Tedenby has to clear waivers because he played 58 games in 2010 when he signed his first contract when he was 20, so the clock has started on his 'seasons' and this would be his fourth.
I think Yayo has to clear because he signed when he was 19, and played 28 games in 2010, so that's his first year - which makes this his 4th.
Edit - someone could check my logic on the above, but I think I'm right...
For what it's worth - I think Gelinas starts the year in the AHL until someone gets dinged. Urbom starts there too, because he doesn't have to clear.
Capgeek's waiver calculator has Urbom as Not waiver exempt since he has played over 10 NHL games and is in his 4th year. He would have to go on waivers.
Saugus
Ecrasez l'infame!
This would be my preference too. Though my ideal scenario would be Volch getting traded and Gelinas taking that spot.
Marc-E-
Registered User
MartyOwns
thank you shero
- Apr 1, 2007
- 24,261
- 20,318
based on pete’s comments, I think its more likely severson makes the team over merrill.
Classic Devil
Spirit of 1988
That would frustrate me. Not because I don't think Severson is good, or going to be good, because he's not that bad right now and is going to be better, but because Urbom and Gelinas should get any open roster spots on defense.
MartyOwns
thank you shero
- Apr 1, 2007
- 24,261
- 20,318
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
- Jul 23, 2009
- 24,429
- 2
I don't think either will this year. But who knows with pete, so there's that too..
And Jagr and being injured still makes me laugh
And Jagr and being injured still makes me laugh
If we could waive Volch that would be nice, or trade for a pick, if possible. Anything really. Allow room for Harrold and Gelinas/Urbom to stay and frees up some cap to sign Brunner without worrying about the bonus cushion.
OOOOIIIO
Binary
I would swap Brunner and Loktionov. Slide Elias to center on that line.
Too bad we are never getting rid of Volch that easily.
This.
Why not waive the guy since we have 2 or 3 better options in the system? The real question is this... do we pay Volchenkov to hurt our team by playing or do we pay Volchenkov to not hurt our team while utilising a better player that will cost us close to the minimum and actually make us a better club?
The answer seems pretty obvious.
For those who would say "It'll give us a bad rep if we want to sign other pending UFA's?". I'll answer that by saying "If you play well, there's no need to worry about a thing but in #28's situation, we all know that isn't the case".
I trust Lou to make a decision to benefit the team on the ice. Obviously he'd need to clear this with the moneymen but I don't think it's an issue. They would be waiving Volchenkov and paying him not to play in favor of someone making less than a million. If they waived Volch and signed someone for $1 mil plus then it's a problem.
TrufleShufle
Registered User
- Aug 31, 2012
- 7,771
- 15,381
thats what im saying, everyone seems to be under the assumption he will be bought out next year regardless. why not figure out the buyout penalty and shop him around with the idea of retaining that amount and get whatever we can.
going to have to pay that amount anyways, at least get something for it.
Brooklyndevil
Registered User
Good picks. I'm not a real big fan of Harrold and do not want to lose any of our Swedes.
Would you give up as much as a 5th round pick for a guy that will drag your defensive unit to the ground?
I wouldn't give Rod Pelley for #28. If I'm taking #28, I'm asking for additional compensation like the Sharks asked when we traded them Malahkov (circumstances weren't the same but you know what I mean).
Volchenkov is the elephant in the room (he's been that for the past 2 or 3 years IMO) and the only reason he's still around is his contract.
Brooklyndevil
Registered User
I guess if the Organization doesn't care about upsetting a vet, they should waive him as others have suggested.
Last edited:
TrufleShufle
Registered User
- Aug 31, 2012
- 7,771
- 15,381
im saying this under the idea he is being bought out either way next year, figure out the penalty and retain it. if no one is interested so be it, it will just end up being what everyone thought regardless.
and i know he is bad, saying no one would trade a broken stick for him is one thing, but to say he can't 3rd pair any defense in the league if someone decides to take him is pushing it. prolly won't be moved but that would be the only way possible if it happened.
