Goalie Situation

The first season in which a Player who is age 20 or older plays in one (1) or more Professional Games shall constitute the first year for calculating the number of years he is exempt from Regular Waivers and Re-Entry Waivers.

The problem is that “Professional Games” include “all minor league regular season and playoff games”, meaning last year was Bartulis’ third year (two with the Phantoms). As he’s 23, three years from signing, and has exactly 60 NHL games played (including playoffs), to me, that means he has to go through waivers.

But Jenn said he doesn’t. So I go to page 68 (Art. 13.4, ex. c) and see that:

“A 20 year old Player (as Bartulis was when he signed) who plays in one or more Professional Games (as Bartulis did) in the [07-08] season will be exempt from Regular and Re-Entry Waivers” from 07-08 through 09-10.

Again, consistent with what I concluded above. But underneath that:

“Note: Once a 20 year old Player has played in his 160th NHL Game, he will immediately become eligible for Regular and Re-Entry Waivers.”

So, he’s eligible for re-entry waivers – based on the three years – but he would have been eligible sooner had he reached 160 NHL games within the past three years.

I’m no expert, but I say Bartulis has to go through waivers (having nothing to do with his contract, btw). As I said on BSH Radio this week, something tells me the Flyers didn’t know this when they acquired Matt Walker, thinking Bartulis can be moved up and down throughout the league. Now, as Art. 13.2 says, the “‘Playing Season Waiver Period’ shall begin on the twelfth (12th) day prior to the start of the Regular Season…”

So… if my math is correct… the Flyers have to send him to the minors by September 25th, before noon, in order to not have to place him on re-entry waivers. Which they might have to do anyway, but I’m done looking at the CBA for tonight.

Oskar’s birthday is Jan 21, 1987.

Note that Article 13 is Waivers, and Article 9 is entry level contracts.

From article 13.4, the special definition for age:

Note:
1. For purposes of this Article, a “year” of exempt ion shall mean a playing
season.
2. For purposes of this Art icle, “age 18” means a Player reaching his
eighteenth birthday between January 1 next preceding the Entry Draft and
September 15 next following the Entry Draft, both dates included; “age
19” means a Player reaching his nineteenth birthday in the calendar year
of the Entry Draft; “age 20” means a Player reaching his twentieth
birthday in the calendar year of the Entry Draft; and “age 21” means a
Player reaching his twent y-first birthday in the calendar year of the Entry
Draft.

Oskars was drafted in 2005, at the age of 18 for the purposes of this article. But here’s the weird part:

From the examples in 13.4:

(b) An 18 year old drafted in the ’05 Entry Draft who does not sign an SPC
unt il July 2006 at the age of 19, and plays eleven (11) NHL Games in the 2006-07
season, will be exempt as follows:
Season Regular Waivers/Re-Entry Waivers
05-06 n/a
06-07 Exempt
07-08 Exempt
08-09 Exempt
09-10 Eligible
Note: Once an 18 year old or 19 year old Player has played in his 160th NHL Game, he
will immediately become eligible for Regular and Re-Entry Waivers.

This is what Oskars did, drafted in 05 but signed his SPC on Sept 23, 2006, which put him into this example. But remember that Bartulis did not play any NHL games that first year, so this example isn’t perfect. This is where it gets confusing: This example doesn’t actually tell us whether to treat him as an 18 year old or a 19 year old. The only definition given is the age the year he’s drafted. There’s no language indicating that this definitely makes us treat him as a 19 year old player for the purposes of this article. That’s the crux of the problem, right there.

Now, the slide rule was enacted because he did not play in the NHL in 06-07. From Article 9.1:

(d) (i) In the event that an 18 year old or 19 year old Player signs an SPC
with a Club but does not play at least ten (10) NHL Games in the first season under that
SPC, the term of his SPC and his number of years in the Entry Level System shall be
extended for a period of one (1) year, except that this automat ic extension will not apply
to a Player who is 19 according to Section 9.2 by virtue of turning 20 between September
16 and December 31 in the year in which he first signs an SPC. Unless a Player and Club
expressly agree to the contrary, in the event a Player’s SPC is extended an addit ional year
in accordance wit h this subsection, all terms of the SPC, with the exception of Signing
Bonuses, but including Paragraph 1 Salary, games played bonuses and Exhibit 5 bonuses,
shall be extended; provided, however, that the Player’s Paragraph 1 Salary shall be extended in all circumstances.

So the slide rule extends the contract, but it shouldn’t change the signing date, so his “First SPC signing age” is still 19, but by the definition in 13.4 he still meets the definition for age 18 for the purposes of waivers, except for that weird example that confuses everything.

Back to 13.4, starting with the table at the top (this is a “whichever mark you hit first” table):

13.4 Exempt Players. Players who meet the criteria set forth below are exempt from
Regular and Re-Entry-Waivers:
SKATERS
Age Years from Signing–NHL NHL Games Played
18 5 160
19 4 160

Farther down in 13.4:

For purposes of Regular Waivers and Re-Entry Waivers, the five (5) year
exemption for an 18 year old skater and the four (4) year exempt ion for a 19 year old
skater shall both be reduced to three (3) years commencing the first season that the 18 or
19 year old skater plays in eleven (11) NHL Games or more. The next two (2) seasons,
regardless of whether the skater plays any NHL Games in either season, shall count as the
second and third years toward satisfying the exemption

.
So he doesn’t meet the NHL games played mark, and the years have not been reduced to 3 because he didn’t play in 11 games or more early enough for that clause (in bold above) to shorten the number of years he needed. The real question is whether or not to treat him as an 18 year old player or a 19 year old player, and whether he needed 5 years or 4 years from signing to lose his exemption. If it’s 5 years, as the definition for age suggests, he’s not there yet. If it’s 4 years, which is where we’re all confused, then he could have it.