Movement of players between leagues has nothing to do with two-way or one-way contracts. A two-way contract only means you get paid less in the AHL than in the NHL.
no one is saying anything about waivers here, two way contracts exist because players move between leagues obviously an owner isnt going to want to pay the same if a player spends time in the A, its why attard just signed a 2 year 2way/1way contract, because if they park him in the AHL they dont have to pay the full nut it has nothing to do with being waiver exempt so i dont know why youre mentioning it here. why else would there be a need for a two way contract?
its worth mentioning because zamula just signed a one way deal for 2024, he was still on a two way last year pretty sure so it factors into decisions. theres always someone signing the cheques that a GM has to answer to, president keeps the GM from going over budget but all this is besides the point i was making. all things being equal if someone is getting sent down a two way contract is good indication of where they are in the depth chart
You’re the guy who thinks Gauthier is going to play for the Phantoms on an ATO so he can avoid burning a year of his ELC, right?
lol no im the guy that said it was an option im sure youll go through all the comments to confirm though
Yep. Comcast doesn't have cash flow issues.
This post reads like if we had asked ChatGPT to describe outdated hockey front-office management. Playing prospects in suboptimal lineups is not throwing them to the wolves as long as you aren't stubbornly pushing them to top line/pairing minutes despite them showing they can't handle it. And you follow-up statement about exclusively using preseason and occasional callups to gauge NHL readiness succeeds in putting small sample size on a pedestal. Players show they are ready for the NHL primarily by playing in the NHL. Some even stand out more in a better-structured system than in the AHL.
Success in the AHL doesnt equal success in the NHL and I trust the actual hockey people that are the closest to the situation to have better reads than people here dont be a silly sally, no team wants their prospects developing in sub optimal lineups, thats exactly what I mean by throwing them to the wolves. Theyve already shown they cant handle it, and theyll earn their chance when the team feels theyre ready. Its not my decision, and calling it outdated is laughable ur such a jokester sometimes
You can see a lot in a month of practice and exhibition games, not enough to make definitive prediction, but enough to know if you want to throw that player to the wolves or give him more time to develop. Players who are NHL ready jump out at you, it's not a matter of scoring, that's stochastic, but driving play, being in proper position, etc., and of course, whether they physically have a NHL skill set.
Turns out the Spartans were grossly overrated, the Sacred Band of Thebes kicked their ass.
Hockey isn't baseball, players only spend a couple years in an organization before they sink or swim. Most players are in the CHL until 20-21 or longer in the SHL or KHL.
at this point youre just arguing against things I wasnt saying lol where did I say they cant be allowed? youre excited to see prospects play and thats cool we all are, but theres no rush. theyll be in the lineup when theyre ready and when the team feels it will be the best timing. be patient and dont worry so much man
If this is a bit, please DM me and we can laugh together at my naivete. Otherwise ...
I particularly enjoyed the self-defeating statement that prospects can't be allowed to play in suboptimal line-ups. Bottom line: don't play prospects in the NHL until they have enough NHL experience to be a member of an ideal roster.
