Toggle sidebar

Canucks' Training Camp Thread

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,164
2,613
Vancouver
stevecanuck16 said:
With Schneids and Lu bringing the total to 23. If this is the case, we're not choosing Barker over Schroeder, Barker is as good as waived. We're choosing to not expose Ebbett to waivers now and instead dropping Schroeder temporarily until Kesler can be put on LTIR. Then, we will call up Schroeder and not have to place Ebbett on waivers until after Kesler returns. Ebbett remains the 13th forward. (And yes, I do think that Ebbett would be claimed given the awful names having already been claimed).

At that point, yes, we may have to expose Ebbett to waivers, but at the very least it will be after we have Kesler back. Am I off anywhere? I think Gillis's comments match up pretty exactly with this scenario.
Click to expand...

The Canucks don't need Kesler on their finalized roster to get him on LTIR. They aren't over the cap, even with Schroeder, so they don't need either Kesler or Booth on their finalized roster because without being over the cap they don't qualify for LTIR.

Right now (excluding Kesler and Booth) the Canucks have 24 players on their roster (13F, 9D, 2G). In order to get under the roster limit today by 2PM, they need to send Schroeder down to the minors or make a trade. In order to bring Schroeder back up, they need to waive someone or have someone be injured enough to go on the IR.

I'm arguing that if they plan on bringing Schroeder back up soon and plan on doing so by waiving someone (i.e. Barker), it makes more sense to waive Barker today, when every team is finalizing their roster and won't have space to simply claim him without making a corresponding move. If they wait even until tomorrow to put a player on waivers, they run the risk of a team suffering an injury in a game and suddenly having a need and roster space for said player.

Tiranis said:
Based on what you looked up yesterday it seemed to me like they could waive guys anytime during the day (or during business hours anyway) and they would clear within 24 hours. Did I misunderstand or misremember something?
Click to expand...

I think the waivers period is always 24 hours (unlike in the previous CBA where it was 48hrs if it happened over the weekend). Unless they've radically changed waivers, usually there is a deadline (noon EST) to place a player on waivers for that day. Given that all the waivers moves over the last week have been in the morning, I'm guessing that's still in place.

Perhaps they're also trying to make a deal with some other team to get rid of one of these guys in return for someone who can be sent down without having to clear waivers. Maybe looking to deal Alberts for someone like that... ? Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's entirely possible.
 
stevecanuck16

stevecanuck16

Registered User
Jul 28, 2009
1,416
0
opendoor said:
Yes. Barker can't be "as good as waived" he either had to be waived yesterday or he's part of the team's 23 man roster. Given that he wasn't waived, it appears the team is going with 12 forwards and 9 defensemen for its initial roster once Schroeder is sent down. It also appears that neither Kesler or Booth will be on the 23 man roster but will be put on IR.

In order to get Schroeder back on the roster they'll have to waive someone else which means if he's coming back in a day or two, they're just delaying the inevitable. It really comes down to when a player on waivers is more likely to be claimed, now or in a few days. I think that's up for debate.
Click to expand...

That just doesn't make sense to me. Is there really a risk of Barker being claimed at any point?

I know we haven't been told Barker is waived, but we also haven't been told Schroeder has been sent down. Everything has been hypothetical at this point.

There is also the possibility that both will be sent down and Gillis wants to grab someone on waivers. That could explain why we haven't heard anything yet, as he would have to wait to find out if his claim was successful.

If you're right about Kesler only being on IR, that would be pretty awesome as it would indicate he'd be back sooner than expected. I just don't think it's correct.
 
opendoor

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
stevecanuck16 said:
That just doesn't make sense to me. Is there really a risk of Barker being claimed at any point?

I know we haven't been told Barker is waived, but we also haven't been told Schroeder has been sent down. Everything has been hypothetical at this point.

There is also the possibility that both will be sent down and Gillis wants to grab someone on waivers. That could explain why we haven't heard anything yet, as he would have to wait to find out if his claim was successful.
Click to expand...

Barker cannot be sent down today because he hasn't been waived. Waivers take 24 hours to clear so if he was to be sent down today we'd have heard about him being put on waivers yesterday. The only way I'm aware of that the Canucks can be compliant with the 23 man roster restriction that comes into effect today is to demote Schroeder (or make a trade).

If you're right about Kesler only being on IR, that would be pretty awesome as it would indicate he'd be back sooner than expected. I just don't think it's correct.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with the length of time he'll miss. You only put players on LTIR when you need their exemption to exceed the cap. The Canucks in their current configuration aren't at the upper limit so Kesler and Booth will start on normal IR and not be part of the 23 man roster. If they need his exemption at any point, then they can put him on LTIR.
 

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,164
2,613
Vancouver
stevecanuck16 said:
That just doesn't make sense to me. Is there really a risk of Barker being claimed at any point?

I know we haven't been told Barker is waived, but we also haven't been told Schroeder has been sent down. Everything has been hypothetical at this point.
Click to expand...

If Barker was waived, I'm almost certain we would have heard about it by now. Teams can't hide the fact they've put a player on waivers, that information gets disseminated to all other teams so they know they can make a claim.

Schroeder hasn't be sent down officially, but the Canucks need to send down a player who isn't eligible for waivers (either Schroeder, Kassian, or Tanev) by 2PM PST to get under the roster limit. They can't send anyone else down at that point because they haven't yet cleared waivers in order to be sent down.

There is also the possibility that both will be sent down and Gillis wants to grab someone on waivers. That could explain why we haven't heard anything yet, as he would have to wait to find out if his claim was successful.
Click to expand...

Barker can't be sent down until Sunday at the earliest, most likely now, because the earliest he could be placed on waivers is tomorrow unless there are some special rules that no one knows about. Gillis can't make a waiver claim at this point without replacing either Tanev or Kassian in the short term (assuming that Schroeder is the one sent down today).
 
stevecanuck16

stevecanuck16

Registered User
Jul 28, 2009
1,416
0
pitseleh said:
The Canucks don't need Kesler on their finalized roster to get him on LTIR. They aren't over the cap, even with Schroeder, so they don't need either Kesler or Booth on their finalized roster because without being over the cap they don't qualify for LTIR.

Right now (excluding Kesler and Booth) the Canucks have 24 players on their roster (13F, 9D, 2G). In order to get under the roster limit today by 2PM, they need to send Schroeder down to the minors or make a trade. In order to bring Schroeder back up, they need to waive someone or have someone be injured enough to go on the IR.

I'm arguing that if they plan on bringing Schroeder back up soon and plan on doing so by waiving someone (i.e. Barker), it makes more sense to waive Barker today, when every team is finalizing their roster and won't have space to simply claim him without making a corresponding move. If they wait even until tomorrow to put a player on waivers, they run the risk of a team suffering an injury in a game and suddenly having a need and roster space for said player.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying now, I slightly misunderstood. My apologies. I still disagree, however, that this is all related to the possibility of Cam Barker being claimed. Something else is clearly in the works here.

To play the devil's advocate to your scenario, though, if Barker is waived today, a team like NYI could have grabbed him. Tomorrow, their roster will be full and they have no need for him.

Does anyone have an actual source on the Kesler situation? I've heard multiple things now. Some are saying LTIR, some are saying IR.

Again, all of us who agree that Schroeder will be called up almost immediately after being sent down (probably without ever leaving Vancouver) are just arguing semantics at this point. However, be aware that I am also arguing with the several in here who seem to think that Schroeder is spending the whole year in the AHL because "AV hates rookies" or whatever the logic is. Perhaps I should start quoting people directly.
 

CookieCrumbs*

Guest
As much as I would love to see Schroeder on that 2nd line, it only makes sense to send him down. It's highly probably that Ebbett would be claimed if we sent him down. Schroeder will be sent down, and then called right back up (as others have mentioned).
 
opendoor

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
CookieCrumbs said:
As much as I would love to see Schroeder on that 2nd line, it only makes sense to send him down. It's highly probably that Ebbett would be claimed if we sent him down. Schroeder will be sent down, and then called right back up (as others have mentioned).
Click to expand...

The can't call him up without waiving someone.
 
opendoor

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
Tiranis said:
What's more interesting now is whether he's on his way to Chicago or if he's staying in Vancouver. They needed to send him down to get down to 23 players but is this a mere formality or not?
Click to expand...

I suspect he'll report to Chicago. This isn't a cap move with a bunch of non-waiver eligible players like we saw a year or two ago where 5-6 guys were swapped around to maximize LTIR space. This is a roster numbers move and there are only 3 plausible ways that I know of to clear a spot for Schroeder:

1) Waive someone else and demote them

2) Make a trade to clear a roster spot

3) Put someone from the 23 man roster on IR
 

Land O Lakes

Registered User
Jan 8, 2013
157
0
opendoor said:
The can't call him up without waiving someone.
Click to expand...

Yeah won't they still need to waive someone before bringing him back up? That or until someone gets injured? So I don't see why or how everyone is saying Schroeder will immediately be called back up.
 

Spectrefire

Registered User
Jan 3, 2013
1,176
1,101
I really hope this is just to get the roster in order somehow. But if I see Ebbett as our 2ndC tomorrow night. I think I might just flip.
Land O Lakes said:
Yeah won't they still need to waive someone before bringing him back up? That or until someone gets injured? So I don't see why or how everyone is saying Schroeder will immediately be called back up.
Click to expand...

Well, Gillis did say that if Schroeder gets sent down, he'll be back very soon.
 
Danrik

Danrik

It is what it is.
Oct 17, 2006
1,974
0
Super Surrey, BC
Something has to happen soon, they can't keep 12 forwards and 9 D-men around very long unless they plan to put Vandermeer on the 4th line.
 

ItsAllPartOfThePlan

Registered User
Feb 5, 2006
16,105
6
Calgary
Land O Lakes said:
Yeah won't they still need to waive someone before bringing him back up? That or until someone gets injured? So I don't see why or how everyone is saying Schroeder will immediately be called back up.
Click to expand...

I think they are hoping other teams fill up their holes with the players other teams are waiving today and then they can sneak someone down after, OR

There is a trade coming
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom