Greg Sherman & Co - Record as Colorado Avalanche GM
View Single Post
03-02-2013, 02:16 AM
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Originally Posted by
The league intervened when it looked like Scott Gomez and Wade Redden would have to wait a year and do nothing before they could be bought out--and I think the league would've intervened here as well. In any event it would've been an even bigger and more long-drawn-out mess than it already has been. And the entire league would've been sucked into this ridiculous sideshow.
Sherman deserves to get dinged for not negotiating and not actively shopping a holdout player, thereby leaving them vulnerable to an offer sheet and effectively letting another GM dictate the team's salary structure going forward. A salary structure they were willing to sacrifice three years of investment in a star player to keep intact. He deserves to be fired for that. But he does not deserve to be fired because he didn't orchestrate some stupid Machiavellian scheme because of some ambiguity in the rules that more than a few well-educated people overlooked.
Sherman made the right move to match, and I at least give him credit for doing so quickly and decisively. Too bad he wasn't so quick and decisive in the events leading up to this.
If there's one aspect of this all that Sherman could possibly hold blame for, it would be not knowing that any offer sheet could potentially bring with it the interpretation of the CBA that could result in the team extending the offer sheet giving up the assets, and losing the player to waivers at the same time.
Trying to look at that objectively, and realistically though given the circumstances of no one having the actual CBA in their hands and only the memorandum of understanding, and what appears to be the vagueness of the RFA exemption from this, it's really hard to tell how much of that should be expected of Sherman in this situation.
One could argue that from Feaster's perspective that if he were submitting the offer sheet, right before doing so he should check with the league to make sure his interpretation is correct, and that is kind of fair in my eyes. But it's a bit of another story for Sherman to have the foresight to look at it from another team's perspective and think maybe this interpretation of the CBA rule which we haven't seen yet, may not be correct, and I should check with the league office to see if any team extends an offer sheet to O'Reilly, he'll have to pass through waivers for
first, and if so I can make a big deal out of that so no one does so.
I think that's a somewhat fair critique to make of Sherman, but it's such a weird circumstance, and the fact they haven't actually seen the CBA, it almost seems to me like from the Avs POV, that would have been a very insightful and smart thing to pick up on, not necessarily a damning thing that they
pick up on.
However, if someone wants to stick by the claim that the Avs should have known what would have affected another team in that sense, I can't necessarily fight that. It's just really hard to tell from a laymen's POV.
Originally Posted by
Agreed whole-heartedly on this.
It's too bad that Sherman, and to an extent O'Reilly, allowed the situation to go as far as it did. But I'm not seeing the point in debating it, not matching would have been dumb. Unfortunately for those who don't like GM Sherman, the power of hindsight will be on their side. IF the Flames end up with a Top 5 pick, it's going to be real easy for them to say, "Stupid Sherman, he should have taken the picks!".
And that will be bothersome to me, because there's no possible way to know how the Flames would have played with O'Reilly in the fold. So, like I said, hindsight most likely won't be kind to him, but unfortunately, because of the circumstances that he, and Camp O'Reilly, are responsible for, he was stuck in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation...something that I'm hoping he and the Avs Brass will learn from and therefore won't allow it to happen again.
That's really to me, the more important evaluation of the Avs, and Sherman's decision making process in this whole offer sheet thing.
There's lots of well this could have happened kind of scenarios, but the most objective way to view this is in regard to whether they should have matched or not. There's just a mind blowing number of aspects to this, for me to sit here and question everything at this point with hindsight of the waiver situation isn't exactly fair IMO unless I'm a well versed CBA and NHL employee that can say, "hey I knew what was going on, and I wouldn't have done what Sherman did."
The most fair evaluation from our standpoint IMO should be, whether they should have matched the offer sheet or not. To me, it's an obvious yes, and doing so quickly serves them better, especially when they surely already evaluated the scenario with a number of different salaries ahead of time.
Originally Posted by
I generally agree with all this, but I don't think the bold is necessarily a good thing. PL doesn't exactly have a good track record with coaching hires, and has never once gone outside his circle. He promoted Sacco in the first place. He brought Granato into the organization, and it's debatable, nay probable, that he organized his re-promotion him after Q left. Q was an old Avs assistant, and Hartley came from within as well. I think Bender nailed it in another thread, our next coach will very likely be one of the following: Quinn, Army, Chenowyth, Roy, or Jacques Martin. Looking at potential names I want to believe otherwise, but I don't want to get let down again.
I can't disagree with this, though I really strongly believe this is PL asserting his will. I don't think he has a strong influence outside of the coaching choices at this point, other then possibly being a mentor to Sherman and available for guidance. I think E. Lacroix, Brad Smith, Sakic and whoever else probably do the job of evaluating the current roster, and players outside that would fit in well and help, and Sherman makes the ultimate decision on a risk vs reward type of scenario, and using his smarts and common sense. Along with negotiating trades and contracts, which are better suited to his expertise.
I do think though as President, and being in the league for as long as he has, PL has developed a level of clout and a reason to say I know what makes a better coach for an NHL franchise than you Sherman the accountant, or you Sakic, and son Eric as ex players, and you Brad Smith as a scout.
Everyone including Korenke probably back this whole heartedly given his two cups, and everyone else's lack of expertise in this area and don't question him.
I won't argue that the coaching choices are a problem in the past and going forward, but not as a result of Sherman. The only way to change that is to get PL to step down somehow, or get a new owner, because Kroenke just doesn't know enough about hockey to know the difference.
Originally Posted by
This will get worse when the other RFA need a contract. If ROR at 50 points is worth 6.5M then what about Landeskog, Duchene etc. This was badly handled by all GMs involved here. And now Sherman needs to manage this with his tight budget
This definitely has the potential to cause a big problem, and I've alluded to this in other threads. Unless O'Reilly plays up to the level he did last year at the very least, and behind two other centers that could be tough, potentially with worse linemates if the coach decides to keep Landy with Duchene or Stastny, it will be very tough to trade him with that GM facing the likelihood of having to qualify him at $6.5M.
This is a very big concern. To me it's kind of close in risk, but I think there's a lot of elements that could hopefully work out in the Avs favor. He could play great. He could indicate a willingness to sign a long term deal for less than $6.5M per. A team could show an interest in him either way.
Any of which could be beneficial to either re-singing him themselves and making him Stastny's replacement, or trading him in a year. Conversely, not matching him runs a very clear risk of a number of things. The Flames could make the playoffs, eliminating the chance at a lottery pick. Potentially being a mid round pick, or possibly being a later round pick if they catch a hot streak in the playoffs like they've done before. They'd also run the risk of picking a player that doesn't pan out that well, or at all at the NHL level no matter where they picked, but especially if it's outside the top 5 or so.
To me, it's an extremely crappy situation, mostly brought on by O'Reilly's insistence on $5M according to TPS, and being forced between two crappy choices by a POS GM in Feaster that broke the unspoken code on offer sheets, and was more to blame for not making sure his interpretation of the RFA rule was correct, than it should have been for Sherman. Ultimately though, a choice I think Sherman probably chose the better of given everything he knew at the time, and given the risk of both decisions.
Last edited by Foppa2118: 03-02-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Foppa2118