Letās review some things, to see how we got here:
1. In 2011, in the original TBIM draft, Ian drafted Radulov (a KHL player) in the 13th round of the PRO draft. See here:
tbim.proboards.com/thread/658/round-13.
2. Radulov, as we all know, was a KHLāer, so Ian stashed Radulov in the minors. See here:
tbim.proboards.com/thread/75/roster. Radulov, at the beginning of 2011, is not listed on Ianās pro-team, but rather on his minor league team.
3. In late 2011-12, Radulov came back to the NHL for 9GP. Ian moved Radulov into his active roster for these 9 games.
4. On July 2nd, 2011, Radulov signed a long-term contract with KHL. Ian VOLUNTARILY dropped Radulov ā who was prospect eligible* - for another prospect, Jonathan Marchessault. See here:
tbim.proboards.com/thread/985/pro-transaction-thread-2011-continued?q=radulov5. On May 24th, 2013 ā Mike added Radulov to his pro roster. But then was forced to drop him, due to the āno contract ruleā. See here:
tbim.proboards.com/thread/982/pro-transaction-thread-2012-2013.
6. In terms of the āKovalchukā rule and grandfathering. Itās a bit hazy, as in the discussion thread that Ian has removed, he continually āeditedā the top post with the rule. He unilaterally changed the criteria about three times ā and in every instance ā the change was done with the end result being that he retained ownership on Radulov in perpetuity.
7. According to our own rules (the āKovalchuk ruleā), āAs of 07/11/13, a player who defects, but was owned for at least 1 season by the most recent GM, can be claimed by the most recent GM upon said players return to the NHL. Said GM can either claim the player or release him. If released, he will be put on waivers to determine who will own him.ā THESE ARE OUR RULES.
8. The above rule does NOT apply to Radulov, as he was only on a pro-roster for 8 gamesā¦no where close to a full season. Ian had the option of putting Radulov back in his minor league system, but chose not to this. He chose to pick up a different prospect.
9. All the other āgrandfathered playersā meet our rule. Burmistrov, Kostitysn, Kovalchuk were all held on a pro roster for one full season before jumping to KHL. And Sobotka ā I wasted a roster spot for one full NHL season while he was in the KHL. (I was allowed to do this because he had a contract, it just wasnāt signed. Hence the Sobotka rule was made, and I was forced to drop him).
10. If you look at defection thread (which Ian has erased), youāll see that Ian changed this rule about three times to make it so that Radulov qualified for grandfathering. And every time he changed the rule, he used the āeditā function to make it so that itās hard to trace the history.
11. You will see that I questioned Radulov being eligible, since Ian didnāt own him on a pro-roster for one full season. (Youāll also see that I questioned a Kovalchuk exception for players that were minor-league eligible, since those players are eligible for the farm and would be voluntary drops).
12. When I questioned Ian about Radulovās eligibility based on owning him for one full season at pro-level, he replied āBased on our rules, recent questions and talk of Radulov don't matter. Per our rules, a player's GP will go by Fantrax. Radulov is a prospect. He will take a farm spot on my team.ā [Radulov was incorrectly listed in Fantrax at 126GP at this point, and hence "qualified" as a rookie. Just as he "qualified" for a rookie when Ian voluntarily dropped him in July 2011).
13. So I email Fantrax and ask them about Radulovās games played. As a result, Fantrax updates their system and Radulov goes to 154 GP and no longer qualifies for Ianās minor league system.
14. So Ian changes the rule again. He drops the āfull seasonā criteria, which REMAINS IN OUR RULEBOOK TODAY, and introduces a series of six broad questions. (Did you draft him? How long did you hold him?, etc.) Note that this new rule has NO FIRM CRITERIA, as the six questions are just opened ended. In essence, this new rule gives Ian sole authority to determine who gets grandfathered ā and sure enough ā Radulov qualifies for it.
15. At this point, I just threw my hands up and gave upā¦since Radulov coming back was still hypothetical. But I believed then, as I believed now, that unilaterally changing our rules to allow Ian to grandfather Radulov for his own team was completely unfair.
16. After Mike claim Radulov, he sent me a PM telling me he did this and asked what I thought. I told him that I believed Radulov didnāt quality for the Kovalchuk exception, and that IMO Radulov should go on waivers and be assigned to Tampa Bay (worst team based on record last year). I also noted that this would soften the blow from the draft lottery, where TB fell to 4th place. Mike responded that he was fine with Radulov going to TB.
17. Then the shit storm occurs. Mike posts the old threads where I question Radulovās eligibilityā¦and Ian erases them. Then Ian takes away Mikeās ability to post anything in Fantrax or Proboards. Then Ian removes the thread from Fantrax entirely so nobody can review the history of this evolving "rule". (But it is still accessible as a direct link at:
tbim.proboards.com/thread/1682/defected-player-list).
18. Ianās response to all this? āSo on numerous levels, everyone who has such a player was grand-fathered, even Sobotka. That is how things came to be like it or not. It was all done on the fly and retro-active to Kovalchuk's time. So I don't wanna here about how it was fair or it is fair. It is what it is. And it is over. So if anyone feels the need to post 500 things about it, have at it. Nothing will change.ā
19. It was bull shit then. And itās bull shit now. To say that this rule was settled a long time ago is also bull shit. Half the league was likely unaware of what was going on. And Ian locked the thread so that no further discussion could happen. There was never any vote.
@chris and @david. I find your references that basically say "it's ok for Ian to claim Radulov because it's in the rules" to be utter non-sense. First, it's not in our rules. It's only in a post which Ian has locked and hidden from everyone. And as I said, if you read that post, you'll see that the criteria used for grandfathering were changed numerous times, unilaterally by Ian, and always to his benefit.
And just to be clear, I like this league. I have a lot invested in it. I think Ian is a good person. But I question his actions and decisions as a Commissioner on this issue. It's clearly a conflict of interest to change a rule that directly favour your team, then cut off debate and lock a thread, and then say "it's a rule - people could have spoken up earlier."