Media Buying out a ban and playing the same season

This post was made for 2 reasons. The first reason, and most important, was because we are trying to add polls every week that address some items that are current in the league, for the purpose of discussing on the weekly podcast. This is the main reason we are doing this. We hope the secondary benefit is that the community gets to weigh in on a topic and give their opinion. We are not posting these because we are looking to complain about issues in the league and give whiners a place to complain We hope this is a constructive and thought out discussion but as we all know from Social Media, that doesn't always happen. Sometimes the responses are emotional, reactionary and aggressive. That will almost always happen in this online social environment and we all should expect it when reading these posts.

I am refraining from any response here with my own opinion. I do not want to influence people's votes or thoughts while the poll is going on.
I and the rest of the podcast team will be discussing this on Sunday with the podcast. Feel free to tune in as always and give us your thoughts on the discussion through the YouTube chat box.

 

Who cares, just be the best.

 

You are assuming that going back to your team's TC is a bad thing for everyone. In the case of an NHLer, they go down to the AHL, the NHL's TC. Perhaps if a player has played on an AHL team, then sent up to the NHL, they may not always want that to happen and would prefer to go back down to their original AHL. This would be one way to force your NHL team's hand get you back on the AHL team. Not saying this happens often. I'm sure it doesn't. I'm just saying its a possibility.

 

Where there are loopholes, they will always be exploited. It is management's job and those who make the rules to ensure those loopholes are not there and the rules are sound.

 

They normally don't stay on the teams TC very long. If they were forced to stay on TC, I'd be ok with that. Already seen at least 3 players on a ban buyout back up with the club or traded and called up.

 

Yeah some of these guys who buy out the ban aren't on TC. Pretty much forcing trades to where they want to go.

 

The issue is not a problem if the player is rotting on a CHL TC. If an NHL player is left to rot, he is affecting an AHL team now...unless of course that is where he wanted to be in the first place!

 

A player from team A is traded but now goes back the Team A because of the player quitting, getting banned and buying out their ban.
What is the value now of this "asset"? Value has probably reduced because:
1. Other teams know Team A wants to move this player, so the seller has the onus to move the player. Buyers have the upper hand
2. The player knows they were traded once already and has already responded in a negative way. Again, the value of the player is now much lower than before since every other team knows this

As for leverage from the TC, they have already flexed that muscle when the quit and buy back in. They have jumped through the loophole in the system that allows them to not accept a decision made by their former team's management. Even if they did not buy out the ban, they have used leverage by quitting and affecting the team they just left in a negative manner by losing an asset. If they sign back up, they now continue to be a problem for their team as they now need to be moved or left on TC.

....again, of course that's not the case if the player wanted to be on the "TC" to begin with.

 

Every ban should be a a ban for the remainder of the season and for the next. No exceptions other than appeals. Then maybe offer a ban buyout for the next season but a ban given during given season should last that season.

Possibly?

 

Hope or not, for example

No Money to be made this way.

 

So the argument here is that the reason for a player to return during the same season is so that the organization who banned him still has a trading chip to sell and doesn't lose a body. Now they will have to sell them for 50 cents on the dollar because the league knows they are a quitter and the only team that's willing to pay close to face value is the team the problematic player wanted to play for in the first place. So in the end, the problem player wins for $50 or whatever the price is. Does the original organization get something in return? Yes, but at what cost to the quality and integrity of the community? Each player gets basically 3 bites at the apple to pull this stunt and it gives too much power to the players in deciding where they play. Makes it hell for managers who should be the ones holding the power.

 

Since this poll is closing and markz is bringing up the integrity of the community..... I’ll just leave this here.

 

grossssssssssssssssssss

 

Frantic TO Iowa

 

Dont you love it when a story comes to a happy ending?!?