Is Zach Hamill subject to waivers?

[InvalidUsername]

Zach Hamill has been a big surprise at Bruins camp. But with this being his 4th pro season (he's 23), is he waiver eligible? I don't know that there's room on the B's for him, and it would suck to lose him just when he finally starts putting it together.

Click to read more...

 

[gifted88]

He's on the last year of his ELC which is 2-way. So he doesn't need to go through waivers

 

[ranold26]

I believe he is waiver eligible.

 

[Tiranis]

He's on the last year of his ELC which is 2-way. So he doesn't need to go through waivers

One way and two way contracts have nothing to do with waiver eligibility, even though EA Sports would like you to believe they do.

 

[InvalidUsername]

He's on the last year of his ELC which is 2-way. So he doesn't need to go through waivers

The thing is, Hamill is a 4th year pro. Normally that'd be waiver eligible. But ELC's are usually only 2 or 3 years. So there's some loophole at work here that's made his ELC four years and I'm wondering if that loophole also affects his waiver eligibility.

 

[mcphllp]

two way contracts have nothing to do with waivers

 

[TheBradyBunch]

I'm no expert but I think he is waiver exempt.
If not, he has a decent chance of getting claimed I'd say.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

Zach Hamill is not exempt from waivers

 

[Sverra]

One way and two way contracts have nothing to do with waiver eligibility, even though EA Sports would like you to believe they do.

The thing is, Hamill is a 4th year pro. Normally that'd be waiver eligible. But ELC's are usually only 2 or 3 years. So there's some loophole at work here that's made his ELC four years and I'm wondering if that loophole also affects his waiver eligibility.

I am 99% sure he isn't waiver eigeble, because his ELC slided until season 2009-10. The slide is based on NHL games, not professional games (in this case AHL).

 

[gifted88]

One way and two way contracts have nothing to do with waiver eligibility, even though EA Sports would like you to believe they do.

ha ha, well I know players on ELC's aren't waiver eligible without a certain amount of NHL games played

 

[Fire Sweeney]

Players are exempt from waivers until either 3 years or 160 NHL games

 

[bruinsfan46]

He is waiver exempt for one more year, I recommend reading the following link for waiver rules: http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-waiver-rules/

Hamill signed his ELC as an 18 year old in 2007 so he's waiver exempt for five years, it's only been four. If Hamill was born a couple weeks earlier he would have been considered 19 at the time he signed his ELC but the same September 15th cut off that is used for the draft is used to determine a player's age for NHL waiver rules. I see a lot of people confused as to how he's seemingly been on a three year ELC for four years, he hasn't. It's common knowledge that a year of an ELC isn't burned if a player is 18 or 19 and didn't play ten or more NHL games in a season. Hamill's first year pro ('08-'09) he was only 19 by NHL standards and didn't play in the NHL so he didn't burn a year off his ELC. It's the same as returning a draft pick to juniors who has been signed. So a player born two weeks earlier than Hamill who signed an ELC at the same time would no longer be waiver exempt and he would be off his ELC but Hamill's late birthday gives the Bruins an extra year.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

He is waiver exempt for one more year, I recommend reading the following link for waiver rules: http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-waiver-rules/

Hamill signed his ELC as an 18 year old in 2007 so he's waiver exempt for five years, it's only been four. If Hamill was born a couple weeks earlier he would have been considered 19 at the time he signed his ELC but the same September 15th cut off that is used for the draft is used to determine a player's age for NHL waiver rules. I see a lot of people confused as to how he's seemingly been on a three year ELC for four years, he hasn't. It's common knowledge that a year of an ELC isn't burned if a player is 18 or 19 and didn't play ten or more NHL games in a season. Hamill's first year pro ('08-'09) he was only 19 by NHL standards and didn't play in the NHL so he didn't burn a year off his ELC. It's the same as returning a draft pick to juniors who has been signed. So a player born two weeks earlier than Hamill who signed an ELC at the same time would no longer be waiver exempt and he would be off his ELC but Hamill's late birthday gives the Bruins an extra year.

Blamo, that chart's great

 

[InvalidUsername]

He is waiver exempt for one more year, I recommend reading the following link for waiver rules: http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-waiver-rules/

Hamill signed his ELC as an 18 year old in 2007 so he's waiver exempt for five years, it's only been four. If Hamill was born a couple weeks earlier he would have been considered 19 at the time he signed his ELC but the same September 15th cut off that is used for the draft is used to determine a player's age for NHL waiver rules. I see a lot of people confused as to how he's seemingly been on a three year ELC for four years, he hasn't. It's common knowledge that a year of an ELC isn't burned if a player is 18 or 19 and didn't play ten or more NHL games in a season. Hamill's first year pro ('08-'09) he was only 19 by NHL standards and didn't play in the NHL so he didn't burn a year off his ELC. It's the same as returning a draft pick to juniors who has been signed. So a player born two weeks earlier than Hamill who signed an ELC at the same time would no longer be waiver exempt and he would be off his ELC but Hamill's late birthday gives the Bruins an extra year.

Very interesting.

I had no idea that you could play in the AHL and have that NOT count as a year on your contract. I thought only juniors/college (because it's amateur) or Europe (becuase that is not directly affiliated with the NHL) exempted you from your contract kicking in.

So if the Sens sign Zibanejad to a standard 3 year ELC. And he plays all of this year and next in the AHL, he'll still owe them 3 more years at ELC money? They could basically get 5 years out of him at the pro level for ELC money [if they wanted to]?

 

[BruinsBtn]

Very interesting.

I had no idea that you could play in the AHL and have that NOT count as a year on your contract. I thought only juniors/college (because it's amateur) or Europe (becuase that is not directly affiliated with the NHL) exempted you from your contract kicking in.

So if the Sens sign Zibanejad to a standard 3 year ELC. And he plays all of this year and next in the AHL, he'll still owe them 3 more years at ELC money? They could basically get 5 years out of him at the pro level for ELC money [if they wanted to]?

I don't think so, it's a weird loophole because of another weird loophole.

The first rule says players can't play in the AHL unless they are 20.
But there is a loophole for players who have already played 5 years of junior (Hamill started in Everett at 14)

The second rule is that all ELCs must be 3 years.
The second loophole is that for players signed out of junior, the first year doesn't count if they don't play 10 NHL games. It doesn't apply to players signed out of Europe.

Hamill is the only player who has fallen through these two loopholes, as far as I know. Very few players start in junior that young.

 

[bruinsfan46]

Very interesting.

I had no idea that you could play in the AHL and have that NOT count as a year on your contract. I thought only juniors/college (because it's amateur) or Europe (becuase that is not directly affiliated with the NHL) exempted you from your contract kicking in.

So if the Sens sign Zibanejad to a standard 3 year ELC. And he plays all of this year and next in the AHL, he'll still owe them 3 more years at ELC money? They could basically get 5 years out of him at the pro level for ELC money [if they wanted to]?

Correct, Mika Z could play this season and next season in the AHL playing nine or less NHL games and he would still have all three years left on his ELC in 2013. Nicklas Bergfors is a fellow Swede who came over as an 18 year old and played two teenage AHL seasons and didn't burn a year on his ELC until his third AHL season when he was 20.

I don't think so, it's a weird loophole because of another weird loophole.

The first rule says players can't play in the AHL unless they are 20.
But there is a loophole for players who have already played 5 years of junior (Hamill started in Everett at 14)

The second rule is that all ELCs must be 3 years.
The second loophole is that for players signed out of junior, the first year doesn't count if they don't play 10 NHL games. It doesn't apply to players signed out of Europe.

Hamill is the only player who has fallen through these two loopholes, as far as I know. Very few players start in junior that young.

Just to clarify because you seem kinda confused, Hamill was able to play in the AHL in 2008-09 because he met both requirements for players drafted out of the CHL. He was 20 year olds by December 31st (the AHL/CHL rule does not use the September 15th cut off, they use the end of the calendar year) and had four seasons of CHL experience. His four regular season games and 20 playoff games as a 15 year old don't count as a season of CHL experience (the WHL drafts a year earlier than the other two leagues but draftees aren't allowed to play the full season). Any player drafted out of the CHL must either be 20 years old by December 31st or played four full years in the CHL (and considering you can't play a full season in the CHL until you're 16 this loophole is really only for Jason Spezza and John Tavares who didn't need it in the last decade because everyone else with four years of experience will be 20 anyway) to play in the AHL. The must play 10 NHL games to burn a year off of an ELC for 18 and 19 year olds applies to all drafted players not just juniors, Europeans as well.

 

[Bizarro Bandwagoner]

So did TSN incorrectly list him as being on waivers today or did you have something wrong?

 

[TheBradyBunch]

So did TSN incorrectly list him as being on waivers today or did you have something wrong?

Maybe they chose to waive him? I'm almost positive he isnt eligible

 

[Flyersfan1014]

Haha everyone's wrong he's on waivers.

 

[Lost Horizons]

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/bruins/extras/bruins_blog/2011/09/zach_hamill_pla.html

Zach Hamill placed on waivers, awaits AHL assignment

Zach Hamill, the No. 8 overall pick of the 2007 draft, has been placed on waivers with the purpose of being assigned to Providence. TSN first reported the transaction.

This is Hamill’s fourth professional year, but he remains on his entry-level contract, which is good for three seasons for most junior players. Hamill is on an entry-level slide because of his late birth date (Sept. 23, 1988) and when he signed his contract (Aug. 8, 2007).

According to assistant GM Jim Benning, Hamill must clear waivers because he has played in the AHL for three full seasons.

Hamill has been a major disappointment. The 23-year-old center has appeared in four NHL games, recording one assist. Hamill has yet to establish himself as a consistent AHL center. Last season, Hamill put up a 9-34—43 line in 68 games. If Hamill is not claimed, the Bruins are hoping he will develop more efficiently under first-year head coach Bruce Cassidy, formerly Rob Murray’s assistant.

 

[wej20]

He'd played 3 full years of pro hockey that usually makes you subject to waivers.

 

[bruinsfan46]

I was wrong, when it comes to waiver eligibility they use a December 31st end of the year so he was considered 19 when he signed. Three years of AHL hockey isn't a rule, the chart I posted still applies.

 

[Habsfan18]

Since the question has been answered, I'm going to shut this one down. If you want to continue discussing the current Hamill situation, please do so in the trade rumors board.