Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
just-joe

Anton Babchuk

Recommended Posts

Very well said Colesylarosefan!

I remember hearing about what Babs said and thinking that what he said was pretty much cutting down the rest of his teammates...both on the Rats and with the Canes. It's not right even if he was the very best (which he was not IMO)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Babchuk is done with this organization. JR tried very hard to trade him for a 5th round pick and this was even before the draft. He couldn't even be had for a 5th round pick. Its not like JR was asking for a 1st or 2nd, but a 5th and no takers.

And as far as the argument of he was one of our best defenseman when he got sent down and you can understand why he was angry about that. My answer to that is NO he was not the best defenseman when he got sent down. Yes, he was very good for us in the beginning and he was one of the best defenseman. However, in December his play started detoriating and he wasn't very good. Crap, Tanabe was playing better than he was and Babchuk was finding himself in the pressbox. So management decided that in order for him to work on his skills it would benefit him better to actually play then sit in the pressbox. Which in my mind is the right decision. He's young and it would be better for him to play then sit. And at that time, he wasn't playing good enough to warrant a play with the big boys.

Babchuk thought that he was too good for the AHL, he even made a comment about this how there are others on the team that should be sent down not him. How do you think his former Canes teammates and his now new River Rats teammates took that? He was pretty much saying some of his former teammates didn't warrant to stay with the big club and telling his River Rats teammates that he is too good to play with them.

He's been known to have attitude problems and that attitude is finely catching up to him. Other NHL teams are seeing this and don't want that in their locker room. Until he can get it through his big head that he ain't better than anyone else, I don't want him on this team.

You've got the situation incorrect, though. He wasn't sent down because he had been sitting in the press box and they wanted to get him some playing time, he was sent down when Kaberle was activated off the IR and we had reached the roster limit. He was the only defenseman who didn't have to clear waivers so logically he was the one to go. Saying he wasn't the best defenseman at the time, well, no one had claimed he was. A poster said he was one of our best defensemen that year and that's true, he was fairly consistant. And to say Tanabe was even better, well that's not so bad because he was our best defenseman down the stretch as crazy as that sounds. I just find it funny that you used a made-up scenario to explain why he was sent down ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your correct Shane, it has always been about the two way contract and not having to clear waivers. It was a sound business decision and the only other person on the team with a two way contract was Ladd so which do you send down to make room. Had I been the GM I would have sent Babchuk also and I really like the kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You've got the situation incorrect, though. He wasn't sent down because he had been sitting in the press box and they wanted to get him some playing time, he was sent down when Kaberle was activated off the IR and we had reached the roster limit. He was the only defenseman who didn't have to clear waivers so logically he was the one to go. Saying he wasn't the best defenseman at the time, well, no one had claimed he was. A poster said he was one of our best defensemen that year and that's true, he was fairly consistant. And to say Tanabe was even better, well that's not so bad because he was our best defenseman down the stretch as crazy as that sounds. I just find it funny that you used a made-up scenario to explain why he was sent down ;)

What your not getting is he wasn't good enough to crack a roster spot when all defenseman were healthy. He's young and he's not good enough to sit in the pressbox and wait for an injury. He needs to play, not sit. Sending him to Albany was the best option for him. What would the point be keeping him when he wasn't good enough to get a spot. When Tanabe is outplaying you, well something is wrong.

You seem to like the guy, so would you want to deter his growth by keeping him with the big boys and sitting him in the pressbox or would you rather send him to Albany where he would get plenty of playing time to grow and work on his skills?

I don't care whether he had a 2 way contract or not, he wasn't good enough to crack the line up once all defenseman were healthy. Unfortunetly for him and I guess you, he believed that he was the best defenseman on the team, and well I'll have beg to differ on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What your not getting is he wasn't good enough to crack a roster spot when all defenseman were healthy. He's young and he's not good enough to sit in the pressbox and wait for an injury. He needs to play, not sit. Sending him to Albany was the best option for him. What would the point be keeping him when he wasn't good enough to get a spot. When Tanabe is outplaying you, well something is wrong.

You seem to like the guy, so would you want to deter his growth by keeping him with the big boys and sitting him in the pressbox or would you rather send him to Albany where he would get plenty of playing time to grow and work on his skills?

I don't care whether he had a 2 way contract or not, he wasn't good enough to crack the line up once all defenseman were healthy. Unfortunetly for him and I guess you, he believed that he was the best defenseman on the team, and well I'll have beg to differ on that one.

I'm amazed by how little of the situation you really understand. He was good enough to stay in the lineup. At the time he was playing better than Hutchinson and Tanabe but they were kept in the lineup to be showcased for a possible deadline deal that never came. That's the entire reason he was upset, these guys were playing over him even though he was doing better. That's why he didn't want to go to Albany. The only reason he was taken out of the lineup and sent down was because we wanted to trade those two guys and we had reached the 23 man roster limit. It wasn't an issue of him not being good enough to crack the roster so I have no clue what you're talking about. You're still talking like he was sitting in the pressbox at the time and was sent down to get playing time rather than being a scratch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm amazed by how little of the situation you really understand. He was good enough to stay in the lineup. At the time he was playing better than Hutchinson and Tanabe but they were kept in the lineup to be showcased for a possible deadline deal that never came. That's the entire reason he was upset, these guys were playing over him even though he was doing better. That's why he didn't want to go to Albany. The only reason he was taken out of the lineup and sent down was because we wanted to trade those two guys and we had reached the 23 man roster limit. It wasn't an issue of him not being good enough to crack the roster so I have no clue what you're talking about. You're still talking like he was sitting in the pressbox at the time and was sent down to get playing time rather than being a scratch.

That logic doesn't make any sense as far as Tanabe goes. If we wanted to trade him, why would we re-sign him this year? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That logic doesn't make any sense as far as Tanabe goes. If we wanted to trade him, why would we re-sign him this year? :rolleyes:

Defensive depth? You noticed we didn't pick up Tanabe until he was rejected by EVERYONE else?

Shane had the right situation. Babchuck was better than some of our defensemen at the time he was asked to report to the AHL. Unfortunately, he was the only one with a 2-way contract at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Defensive depth? You noticed we didn't pick up Tanabe until he was rejected by EVERYONE else?

There were other players we could have signed. My point is obviously JR thought Tanabe and/or Hutch deserved to play more than Babs, you can't just claim that it was a showcasing. Doesn't matter how hard anyone wants to think it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Defensive depth? You noticed we didn't pick up Tanabe until he was rejected by EVERYONE else?

I think a little of the Irbe syndrome too, you're not playing for the Canes but since you tried to strong arm us, we'll make sure you can't play for anyone else either. And in the case of Babchuk...we'll keep you around in the bacground just in case there's a slight possibiltiy in being able to get somehting in return for you.

Shane had it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Defensive depth? You noticed we didn't pick up Tanabe until he was rejected by EVERYONE else?

I think a little of the Irbe syndrome too, you're not playing for the Canes but since you tried to strong arm us, we'll make sure you can't play for anyone else either. And in the case of Babchuk...we'll keep you around in the bacground just in case there's a slight possibiltiy in being able to get somehting in return for you.

Shane had it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There were other players we could have signed. My point is obviously JR thought Tanabe and/or Hutch deserved to play more than Babs, you can't just claim that it was a showcasing. Doesn't matter how hard anyone wants to think it was.

...Do you not understand the concept of a two-way contract? Tanabe and Hutch had a 1-way contract, Babs had a two-way. He was the only option to send down without risking losing a player altogether. Does it mean that Babs played worse than either one? No, it just means he was the only player to send down at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Do you not understand the concept of a two-way contract? Tanabe and Hutch had a 1-way contract, Babs had a two-way. He was the only option to send down without risking losing a player altogether. Does it mean that Babs played worse than either one? No, it just means he was the only player to send down at the time.

Yes, I am just a chick who doesn't understand any concept in hockey.....

THANKS, I think I understand the concept of a two-way contract just fine. But you say that JR wanted to get rid of them anyway so what would be the harm of putting them on waivers? Doesn't make any sense to the argument.

And if someone could PLEASE explain to me why JR would "waste" money on a player just so that he can "make sure he can't play for anyone else either" seeing as we were already over the self-imposed cap. Do you think Karmanos and JR sit around trying to find ways to spend money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THANKS, I think I understand the concept of a two-way contract just fine. But you say that JR wanted to get rid of them anyway so what would be the harm of putting them on waivers? Doesn't make any sense to the argument.

Well, first of all, I didn't say they were being showcased for a trade, Shane did. He may be right, but I didn't pay too much attention to that particular situation.

As for "Why not put them on waivers if you want to get rid of them?"....Because if you put them on waivers and they're taken, you get nothing in return. If you trade them, you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, first of all, I didn't say they were being showcased for a trade, Shane did. He may be right, but I didn't pay too much attention to that particular situation.

As for "Why not put them on waivers if you want to get rid of them?"....Because if you put them on waivers and they're taken, you get nothing in return. If you trade them, you do.

Really?? That's how that works?... I did not know that. Thanks for enlightening me :rolleyes:

Moving on Babs is not ever coming back to the Canes, and he will be lucky if he ever sees an NHL jersey again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really?? That's how that works?... I did not know that. Thanks for enlightening me :rolleyes:

Moving on Babs is not ever coming back to the Canes, and he will be lucky if he ever sees an NHL jersey again.

Man, if you didn't have the ability to see into the future, I'd totally call you on that :rolleyes:

See? Sarcasm works both ways :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not want Babchuck back due to his attitude and not reporting to Albany when sent to do so last season. I don't really care or think his language barrier should be an issue. Having said that---- I googled and read these posts (mods I hope ok to post these) from back in Feb. 2007 from the Oil fans and got an outside and both sides of the perspective and have changed my mind and think maybe we should consider him coming back if needed. I did not realize his stats when asked to go down to Albany when Kaberle came back, I understand JR at the time and I now understand Babchuck's feeling at the time, but he over-reacted, made some poor choices (you are accountable for your choices in life and he is paying the price now) and should have waited it out knowing how often the defence gets injured, he probably would have been back soon. If he does not come back, it's of his own doing, that's hockey!

http://oilfans.com/forum/index.php?t=tree&...ev=&reveal=

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time there was talk amongst various sources about Tanabe and Hutchinson being shopped around. We had 10 defensemen under nhl contracts so they were going to clear out some room. That's why those guys were being iced even though Babchuk was playing better. And to say we obviously didn't want to trade Tanabe if we signed him back, well c'mon. It's called defensive depth and wanting someone who's familiar with your system. As I'm sure you noticed he signed a long time after free agency opened so we were in no way desperate to keep him, he was added for depth when injuries occured. It's easier having him come up, having played for us before, and fill in for an injured defenseman as opposed to calling up someone new and having him learn our system while doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from the obvious point, which is that Babchuk won't be back, it's interesting to read the various accounts here.

The simple facts are that it was a combination Babchuk's poor play, two-way contract, and desire to have him get ice-time and instruction in Albany that led to his demotion. In his last 15 games he was a horrible -10 and his TOI had been dwindling. To simply assert that it was only his contract that led to his demotion ignores the full dynamic.

It was actually Hedican's return that bumped Babchuk from the line-up and into the press box for a couple of games before the demotion. Kaberle's return created the roster squeeze but if Babchuk had been playing well enough to see regular ice-time, as he had earlier in the season, he would have been kept. But since he was playing poorly and tentatively and wasn't in the top 7 at the time, it became a no-brainer to send him down.

There was little to no risk that either Seidenberg or Hutchinson would be claimed on waivers and that late in the season the savings gained from Babchuk's two-way contract was minimal. If someone claimed either Seidenberg or Hutchinson, they would have been on the hook for their salaries this year too as each had one-year remaining and both were viewed as spare parts. Tanabe likely would have been claimed given his play at the time and the fact he was a pending FA.

The argument that Babchuk was justifiably upset due to his on-ice performance rings hollow. Had he been earning top 6 minutes, another move would have been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm amazed by how little of the situation you really understand. He was good enough to stay in the lineup. At the time he was playing better than Hutchinson and Tanabe but they were kept in the lineup to be showcased for a possible deadline deal that never came. That's the entire reason he was upset, these guys were playing over him even though he was doing better. That's why he didn't want to go to Albany. The only reason he was taken out of the lineup and sent down was because we wanted to trade those two guys and we had reached the 23 man roster limit. It wasn't an issue of him not being good enough to crack the roster so I have no clue what you're talking about. You're still talking like he was sitting in the pressbox at the time and was sent down to get playing time rather than being a scratch.

So your tight with JR and know for a fact that he was showcasing Hutch/Tanabe to make a trade?

You've got 3 guys that were possibilities to be sent down

Tanabe would have to clear waivers

Hutch would have to clear waivers

Babchuk would'nt have to clear waivers

Tanabe was outplaying both Hutch and Babchuk at the time. So he stays.

Now your down to 2, Hutch and Babchuk. Hutch you could dress as the 7th and use him as a PP specialist. Babchuk, can't use him on the PP nor on the PK. So why keep Babchuk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Do you not understand the concept of a two-way contract? Tanabe and Hutch had a 1-way contract, Babs had a two-way. He was the only option to send down without risking losing a player altogether. Does it mean that Babs played worse than either one? No, it just means he was the only player to send down at the time.

Apparently you aren't too clear on what a 2-way contract is, it has NOTHING to do with having to clear waivers or not.

A two-way contract simply means that a player will earn different amounts of money depending on whether he is currently playing for the NHL team, or one of their minor league affiliates ('farm teams'). While playing in one of the lower leagues, the player's salary, though still paid by the NHL team, will be a lower amount than his NHL salary.

It is a common misconception that a two-way contract allows you to send the player to the farm team without putting him on waivers. In fact, the waiver

rules depend on a number of factors, including the player's age when he signed his first NHL contract and the number of games he has played in the NHL.

http://www.sigames.com/sibase.php?type=view&id=161''>http://www.sigames.com/sibase.php?type=view&id=161' target="_blank">http://www.sigames.com/sibase.php?type=view&id=161[/post]

Sending him down had nothing to do with a 1-way contract or a 2-way contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what a 2-way contract is, it has NOTHING to do with having to clear waivers or not.

True enough and, though they are often linked elements, it's a common misunderstanding.

Take Bayda as an example. He has a two-way contract but must clear waivers because of his experience and service levels in the NHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Take Bayda as an example. He has a two-way contract but must clear waivers because of his experience and service levels in the NHL.

thats scary. I like him and I wish we didnt run the risk of losing him each time we sent him back down. if I am understand correctly that that is what you mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thats scary. I like him and I wish we didnt run the risk of losing him each time we sent him back down. if I am understand correctly that that is what you mean.

Correct, he has to clear waivers despite the two-way (salary level) contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct, he has to clear waivers despite the two-way (salary level) contract.

WOW. WELL I GUESS WE ARE VERY LUCKY THEN! esp since we keep having him come up, he obviously is right on the bubble. One of these days we are going to send him down and we wont have him anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...