View Single Post
08-02-2011, 05:52 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Originally Posted by AEM6729 View Post
There's a huge difference between a one year deal from an arbiter and one from a GM, IMO. Instead of signing a one-year deal after good-faith negotiations between both sides where everybody respects what the other side wants, we're dragging our home-grown superstar and captain through an ugly process where we point out why he isn't worth what he thinks he is.
You've clearly had more palatable negotiating experience than I have. I can't speak specifically for NHL-style arbitration and how nasty it is, but negotiations that directly affect people's paychecks (i.e. sales of wholly-owned businesses where the owner is retiring) are often unpleasant and all of the evidence submitted to an arbiter for a decision would have/should have been brought to the opposing negotiator over the course of the negotiations.

The same case you make to the arbiter should basically be a condensed (either by virtue of the arbiters' role or by other limitations in the process) version of your stance to the opposing negotiator. It's not like new facts are being submitted. In fact, it's really the opposite as certain comparables and financial factors that both sides might use are off the table. If Poile thinks Weber is worth a certain amount, he's already told Weber's representation his reasoning or he's a bad negotiator.

SmokeyClause is offline