Who is on a 2-way contract???

With all the threads on this board and others, I have a question. Which Senators are currently on 2-way contracts? When we're picking prospective lines, I'd like to know who could conceivably be sent down to make space for a Bass, Regin, or Karlsson.

According to CapGeek.com the only two way deals are Foligno, Regin, Lee and Bass and then the rest of the prospects that are all in Bingo.

Foligno is still on a two way? wow, but then again, he's up for RFA next season I believe and that is when he will get his one way if this year he has another improvement year.

SensFan71 wrote:Foligno is still on a two way? wow, but then again, he's up for RFA next season I believe and that is when he will get his one way if this year he has another improvement year.

I don't see him being sent down to Bingo but who knows? It depends on how many forwards come back in a Heatley trade I suppose. If anything has held true it's that one-way contracts rule the day in Ottawa and piss on you if you have a two way regardless of whether you deserve to be in Ottawa or not.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:

SensFan71 wrote:Foligno is still on a two way? wow, but then again, he's up for RFA next season I believe and that is when he will get his one way if this year he has another improvement year.

I don't see him being sent down to Bingo but who knows? It depends on how many forwards come back in a Heatley trade I suppose. If anything has held true it's that one-way contracts rule the day in Ottawa and piss on you if you have a two way regardless of whether you deserve to be in Ottawa or not.

true enough, it's the nature of the contract he signed with the Sens, but he is indeed RFA this season, so am sure his agent (if Foligno has a productive year with the big club) will ensure he gets a one way this time, not sure how much of a raise, but definitely a one way will be demanded.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:

SensFan71 wrote:Foligno is still on a two way? wow, but then again, he's up for RFA next season I believe and that is when he will get his one way if this year he has another improvement year.

I don't see him being sent down to Bingo but who knows? It depends on how many forwards come back in a Heatley trade I suppose. If anything has held true it's that one-way contracts rule the day in Ottawa and piss on you if you have a two way regardless of whether you deserve to be in Ottawa or not.

Then, please, explain Lee.

Wasn't he sent down for parts of the season Pragues? I'm pretty sure he was.

Winchester is a prime example of what I'm talking about. He struggled until Clouston came in and he found a roll as a 4th line grinder. Had he been on a two way deal he'd have been sent to Bingo to improve.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Wasn't he sent down for parts of the season Pragues? I'm pretty sure he was.

Winchester is a prime example of what I'm talking about. He struggled until Clouston came in and he found a roll as a 4th line grinder. Had he been on a two way deal he'd have been sent to Bingo to improve.

Winchester could have been sent down but the concern was he could have been picked up off of waivers not because of the 1way but rather because of the waiver rules for a 25 year old. Lee was indeed sent down last season for short durations.

Phoenix30 wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Wasn't he sent down for parts of the season Pragues? I'm pretty sure he was.

Winchester is a prime example of what I'm talking about. He struggled until Clouston came in and he found a roll as a 4th line grinder. Had he been on a two way deal he'd have been sent to Bingo to improve.

Winchester could have been sent down but the concern was he could have been picked up off of waivers not because of the 1way but rather because of the waiver rules for a 25 year old. Lee was indeed sent down last season for short durations.

Thanks for clearing that up. I don't know why I always forget that 2 way has nothing to do with Waiver rules.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:According to CapGeek.com the only two way deals are Foligno, Regin, Lee and Bass and then the rest of the prospects that are all in Bingo.

Yep. All ELCs, still. Elliott's new deal will be 1-way for sure.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Wasn't he sent down for parts of the season Pragues? I'm pretty sure he was.

Winchester is a prime example of what I'm talking about. He struggled until Clouston came in and he found a roll as a 4th line grinder. Had he been on a two way deal he'd have been sent to Bingo to improve.

I don't remember exactly when it happened, but at one point someone else (Picard? Bell) was sent down instead of Lee, while everyone here thought that Lee was struggling more.

P.S. Roll != Role

wprager wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Wasn't he sent down for parts of the season Pragues? I'm pretty sure he was.

Winchester is a prime example of what I'm talking about. He struggled until Clouston came in and he found a roll as a 4th line grinder. Had he been on a two way deal he'd have been sent to Bingo to improve.

I don't remember exactly when it happened, but at one point someone else (Picard? Bell) was sent down instead of Lee, while everyone here thought that Lee was struggling more.

P.S. Roll != Role

OOPs. I don't know how I missed that. Sorry Role is what I meant. Bell was sat but was he sent down? I don't remember that.

Phoenix30 wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Wasn't he sent down for parts of the season Pragues? I'm pretty sure he was.

Winchester is a prime example of what I'm talking about. He struggled until Clouston came in and he found a roll as a 4th line grinder. Had he been on a two way deal he'd have been sent to Bingo to improve.

Winchester could have been sent down but the concern was he could have been picked up off of waivers not because of the 1way but rather because of the waiver rules for a 25 year old. Lee was indeed sent down last season for short durations.

I'm not sure about that. I remember looking into this question this time last year, and I think the CBA would have protected Winchester from waivers based on the number of years he had played in the NHL (at the time, only 1) and the number of games played (again, at the time). It all depends on how you read the relevant CBA passage on waiver-exempt players (13.4).

For OTT, I think the bigger deal was that we're just not willing to pay a player NHL dollars to play in the AHL. Martin Gerber is the only exception I can think of this last decade, and you have to admit that that scenario was rather extreme. We put up with him and his shoddy goaltending for 2 and 1/2 years before we did it. I certainly can't think of any instances of a Senator on a 1-way deal starting the year in the minors.

In any event, given Winchester's age, NHL experience (this is technically his 3rd year coming up), and his games played (77), he is for sure subject to waivers now, without question.

wprager wrote:
I don't remember exactly when it happened, but at one point someone else (Picard? Bell) was sent down instead of Lee, while everyone here thought that Lee was struggling more.

P.S. Roll != Role

We couldn't send down either Picard or Bell last year.

Picard was on a 1-way deal and, given his accured NHL seasons and games played, was no longer waiver-exempt.

Bell is a trickier case. He was on a 2-way deal, but he must have been subject to waivers because I remember, on trade deadline day, BM put him on waivers. Bell had to clear waivers that day in order to be eligible to play in Bingo after the end of the Senators' season. We could have lost Bell at that point for nothing, but no one picked him up.

But he was so professional about the whole situation, and you cannot blame a player from accepting a salary that was more than he was able to deliver, blah blah blah (sorry, RP, the blahs are not meant for you). Funny, we waived and bought out Emery when he still had 2 years left, after he had one bad season -- after losing the starting job because of off-season surgery. But we waited 2-1/2 seasons to do the same to Gerber.