what is the mission of an ahl farm team?

GarbageGoal

Courage
Dec 1, 2005
22,353
2,377
RI
except Providence has an independent owner and has been no matter where the affiliation/PDC stands, that's usually what the affiliate has control over, and what the parent club dictates, Centrum, most affiliates today don't have options ie signing players, or getting approval from an independent franchise in regards to loans, etc..... EVEN Hershey and Chicago have lost the rights over the years to field a veteran laden team over development, all teams slowly have lost those rights as each PDC was either extended or renewed... Providence has never been an NHL owned franchise no matter where it was based from

it depends on what's stated in the PDC....

Old Larue could give a rat's ass who Boston puts behind the bench or if they dressed up actual bears and skated them. He still can't believe anyone wants to listen or watch the games if they aren't at the arena or on the road.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
Old Larue could give a rat's ass who Boston puts behind the bench or if they dressed up actual bears and skated them. He still can't believe anyone wants to listen or watch the games if they aren't at the arena or on the road.
BUT Until Boston buys the franchise outright, Providence is still independent ownership..... there's no need to extend it till 2029, if they have no intentions of buying the affiliate
 

axecrew

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,284
593
remember the 7 veteran 260 game rule

Ok...but that still doesn't explain what a veteran limit cap is...there is a limit on the number of veterans a team can ice in any game.But since the word "cap" is commonly used in reference to contracts etc, it would imply that there is a limit (cap) on the number of veterans a team can sign. That is untrue.
 

axecrew

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,284
593
not anymore, I've seen issues detailing that even Hershey has been forced to change toward a more development philsophy, which is why the Wolves have lost that stature as Vegas calls every shot, as to who plays there, that's happened over the years where it may have been true where a veteran team could be iced, but most organizations are leaning toward development like Rockford, the era of going it alone and not development, is either archaic or dead.

Which is why the Wolves played in the Calder Cup Championship Series...because they lost their stature about wanting to win...:laugh::oops:o_O
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
Ok...but that still doesn't explain what a veteran limit cap is...there is a limit on the number of veterans a team can ice in any game.But since the word "cap" is commonly used in reference to contracts etc, it would imply that there is a limit (cap) on the number of veterans a team can sign. That is untrue.
it's not true, axe:

that's the rule no matter what Levin does, Vegas has the right to refuse any player signings, even loans in season, have to be approved or reviewed by the parent club, affiliates no longer depending on the PDC AS IT WAS 20-30 YEARS ago in the AHL, I can remember teams signing veterans off European teams after their season ended, that has now gone by the wayside, as much as anything franchise-wise ie development..... no matter what the agreement may have said franchises have adopted the Washington model where all player movement has to be approved by the parent club, no matter who the parent club is.... Vegas got that control when they entered that contract in Chicago.... fans may not like that but that's the MO today even though PDC's are not published publically for fans to understand what those entail, all that is widely known is the rights held by the affiliate, have become less as to what they can and cannot do as the contract stipulates.
 

210

Registered User
Mar 5, 2003
12,393
961
Worcester, MA
210sportsblog.com
This is wrong except for the Devils. All the teams and players want to win. They want to play games. They want to go to the NHL. If all they wanted was development, why play any games? Why keep score if you do play games?

Note that under the two choices it says "primary purpose". The primary purpose of an AHL franchise is to develop NHL players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CHRDANHUTCH

210

Registered User
Mar 5, 2003
12,393
961
Worcester, MA
210sportsblog.com
BUT Until Boston buys the franchise outright, Providence is still independent ownership..... there's no need to extend it till 2029, if they have no intentions of buying the affiliate

The Bruins have no intention of buying an AHL franchise because they totally control the Providence Bruins from afar. There's no need for them to own the team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GarbageGoal

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
The Bruins have no intention of buying an AHL franchise because they totally control the Providence Bruins from afar. There's no need for them to own the team.
except, Darryl, the league granted the current franchise in 1987-88, remember, Providence 's original franchise was sold to Binghamton and is Hartford today..... so in essence Boston has always owned a franchise, whether it was active or not is subject to interpretation, how exactly did Calgary acquire the original franchise rights from New Jersey once the Devils clearly got involved in Capital District, now known as Charlotte, which was originally Albany, because Portland, and to a lesser extent Providence couldn't exist because of the deep rivalry between Philadelphia and Boston, it hurt Providence because most of the promotions since 1992, were started here, not Providence, and has manifested itself in various forms....

it's one of a reasons had Manchester not collapsed when it did, the majority likely wants Boston as the affiliate, but in essence their "control" hurts the affiliate rather than being proactive, in other words, you want the affiliate ownership not to capitulate to the decisions made by Boston, or any other parent club.

Do you always agree any decisions made by the Islanders or Bridgeport benefit the Railers simply because they say so.
 

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,089
727
except, Darryl, the league granted the current franchise in 1987-88, remember, Providence 's original franchise was sold to Binghamton and is Hartford today..... so in essence Boston has always owned a franchise, whether it was active or not is subject to interpretation, how exactly did Calgary acquire the original franchise rights from New Jersey once the Devils clearly got involved in Capital District, now known as Charlotte, which was originally Albany, because Portland, and to a lesser extent Providence couldn't exist because of the deep rivalry between Philadelphia and Boston, it hurt Providence because most of the promotions since 1992, were started here, not Providence, and has manifested itself in various forms....

it's one of a reasons had Manchester not collapsed when it did, the majority likely wants Boston as the affiliate, but in essence their "control" hurts the affiliate rather than being proactive, in other words, you want the affiliate ownership not to capitulate to the decisions made by Boston, or any other parent club.

Do you always agree any decisions made by the Islanders or Bridgeport benefit the Railers simply because they say so.
The Islanders have almost no control whatsoever with the Railers. A echl team hires their own staff and mostly controls what players are on the team.
 

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,089
727
Which is why the Wolves played in the Calder Cup Championship Series...because they lost their stature about wanting to win...:laugh::oops:o_O
The past two years Vegas did not have enough prospects to field a entire ahl team.
 
Last edited:

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,232
4,218
Auburn, Maine
The past two years Vegas did not have enough prospects to take to field a entire ahl team.

different rules, Centrum, who approves all player transactions for the Wolves, which includes the philosophy of the parent club, that goes to the point of the PDC, is Vegas, coaching, as well

all affiliates have had the ability to not have the parent club dictate all player transactions, whether the club is owned directly or indirectly, most affiliated teams have an NHL AGM overseeing that club's interest: remember why Nashville cut ties in Norfolk after 7 months there..... because Nashville's rep was released by the affiliate and what was the result: the affiliation was terminated....

all affiliates in Portland have lost the ability for the franchise to sign players independently, that era of players staying multiple years in a given city has ended as well for those fans to identify with.

I can remember parent affiliates blocking or saying to the affiliate that's not your option no matter if the player was under that affiliate's control or not.
 

210

Registered User
Mar 5, 2003
12,393
961
Worcester, MA
210sportsblog.com
except, Darryl, the league granted the current franchise in 1987-88, remember, Providence 's original franchise was sold to Binghamton and is Hartford today..... so in essence Boston has always owned a franchise, whether it was active or not is subject to interpretation, how exactly did Calgary acquire the original franchise rights from New Jersey once the Devils clearly got involved in Capital District, now known as Charlotte, which was originally Albany, because Portland, and to a lesser extent Providence couldn't exist because of the deep rivalry between Philadelphia and Boston, it hurt Providence because most of the promotions since 1992, were started here, not Providence, and has manifested itself in various forms....

it's one of a reasons had Manchester not collapsed when it did, the majority likely wants Boston as the affiliate, but in essence their "control" hurts the affiliate rather than being proactive, in other words, you want the affiliate ownership not to capitulate to the decisions made by Boston, or any other parent club.

Do you always agree any decisions made by the Islanders or Bridgeport benefit the Railers simply because they say so.

My post was clear and factual. Nothing you've posted here makes any sense in regards to the fact the Bruins have no interest in owning an AHL franchise.
 

axecrew

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,284
593
it's not true, axe:

that's the rule no matter what Levin does, Vegas has the right to refuse any player signings, even loans in season, have to be approved or reviewed by the parent club, affiliates no longer depending on the PDC AS IT WAS 20-30 YEARS ago in the AHL, I can remember teams signing veterans off European teams after their season ended, that has now gone by the wayside, as much as anything franchise-wise ie development..... no matter what the agreement may have said franchises have adopted the Washington model where all player movement has to be approved by the parent club, no matter who the parent club is.... Vegas got that control when they entered that contract in Chicago.... fans may not like that but that's the MO today even though PDC's are not published publically for fans to understand what those entail, all that is widely known is the rights held by the affiliate, have become less as to what they can and cannot do as the contract stipulates.

Wrong Chris...while what you said may be factual..you, yourself, admitted to not knowing the contents of any agreements between parent and affiliate..so how factual we'll never know.

BUT what we do know is that the topic at hand is and was..a cap on veterans.The AMERICAN HOCKEY LEAGUE DOES NOT LIMIT THE NUMBER OF VETERANS ON A ROSTER AT ANY GIVEN TIME! They limit the number who can dress for a game and ONLY that. Any team in the AHL can sign as many veterans as they want...they can only play a certain number at a time.

Conversations between an affiliate and it's parent club are always ongoing and always take both party's views into consideration with regards to player signings.

Please stop trying to change the topic to fit your agenda.
 

axecrew

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,284
593
different rules, Centrum, who approves all player transactions for the Wolves, which includes the philosophy of the parent club, that goes to the point of the PDC, is Vegas, coaching, as well

all affiliates have had the ability to not have the parent club dictate all player transactions, whether the club is owned directly or indirectly, most affiliated teams have an NHL AGM overseeing that club's interest: remember why Nashville cut ties in Norfolk after 7 months there..... because Nashville's rep was released by the affiliate and what was the result: the affiliation was terminated....

all affiliates in Portland have lost the ability for the franchise to sign players independently, that era of players staying multiple years in a given city has ended as well for those fans to identify with.

I can remember parent affiliates blocking or saying to the affiliate that's not your option no matter if the player was under that affiliate's control or not.

Can you please tell me when Nashville was in Norfolk and what players were assigned there.
 

axecrew

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,284
593
Chicago Wolves 2018-19 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com
It doesn't list who on a AHL contact but it seems like quite a lot of career AHL players there where probably more in 2017-2018.

Ok...of the 35 players listed...25 are Vegas Golden Knight contractees...of the remaining 10...5 are injury PTO's...of those remaining 5...3 played what I would call a significant number of games( Wong, Weiss and Wagner)...of the final 2...Lough was either in the ECHL, scratched or hurt the majority of the season...the last one was traded mid-season.

So I would hardly say 3 players would constitute Vegas not being able to field a full AHL team
 

GrGriffins

Registered User
Jan 30, 2017
1,260
607
Grand Rapids, MI
all affiliates in Portland have lost the ability for the franchise to sign players independently, that era of players staying multiple years in a given city has ended as well for those fans to identify with.

I can remember parent affiliates blocking or saying to the affiliate that's not your option no matter if the player was under that affiliate's control or not.

That explains why Portland is the ECHL now and not in the AHL.

NHL teams with AHL affiliates have changed since Portland was in the AHL in regards to how many players can be assigned and how many players an AHL team can sign up. With Detroit, the Red Wings assign 13-15 players to Grand Rapids (AHL). The Red Wings allow the Griffins to sign 5-10 players to fill in the rest of the roster. Any players left over could end up in Toledo (ECHL) to fill any roster spots there (usually they send 2-4 players). The NHL club can allow their AHL affiliates to sign players to fill up the remaining AHL roster and if the NHL team also has an ECHL affiliate, it can sign more players to place 2-4 to fill the ECHL roster. It all depends on who is your NHL affiliate, and what guidelines they set for their AHL affiliate.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->