HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Avalanche match Calgary's Offer Sheet for ROR

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-02-2013, 07:41 PM
  #726
Calculon
unholy acting talent
 
Calculon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,213
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba Thudd View Post
and who's to say O'Reiily's agent didn't know about the rule?

They reportedly had 4 offer sheets (a member of the Avs forum is friends with ROR), but didn't sign. Well, until an offer that was just too good to pass up came along. At 6.5M next year, ROR had to sign, and probably didn't care if he ended up with COL, CGY, or CBJ for that kind of cash.
Probably O'Reilly's agent:

Quote:
adater 4:13pm via Twitter for iPad O'Reilly agent Pat Morris admits on @JeffMarek and @wyshynski podcast he didn't know waiver rule.Said he wouldn't have let Flames sign if so


Last edited by Calculon: 03-02-2013 at 07:47 PM.
Calculon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 07:45 PM
  #727
Paranoid Android
ERMAHGERD
 
Paranoid Android's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 11,634
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Considering the risk can be eliminated by a single phone call, no GM would attempt it unless they are utterly incompetent.
By making that phone call you also eliminate the chance of getting O'Reilly.

Perhaps these GMs are 99% sure they are right? Maybe they knew there are provisions in place that allow them to dissolve the offer sheet due to CBA ambiguity? None of us know the answer to these questions in regards to risk factor.

Paranoid Android is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 07:49 PM
  #728
Freudian
No Guenin, No cry
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 30,896
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paranoid Android View Post
By making that phone call you also eliminate the chance of getting O'Reilly.

Perhaps these GMs are 99% sure they are right? Maybe they knew there are provisions in place allow them to dissolve the offer sheet due to CBA ambiguity? None of us know the answer to these questions in regards to risk factor.
What's the logic behind that statement? How would confirming what the rule is eliminate the chance of getting O'Reilly?

If they are right, the phone call will confirm it and they can go after O'Reilly. If they are wrong, they will lose two-three picks and not get the player if they use an offer sheet and obviously would choose not to.

There is no reason whatsoever to not check with the league if the GM think the rule applies but is vague. Only an incompetent GM would gamble on something like this.

Freudian is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 07:52 PM
  #729
Paranoid Android
ERMAHGERD
 
Paranoid Android's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 11,634
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
What's the logic behind that statement? How would confirming what the rule is eliminate the chance of getting O'Reilly?

If they are right, the phone call will confirm it and they can go after O'Reilly. If they are wrong, they will lose two-three picks and not get the player if they use an offer sheet and obviously would choose not to.

There is no reason whatsoever to not check with the league if the GM think the rule applies but is vague. Only an incompetent GM would gamble on something like this.
Because the NHL does not have final say in the matter. Just like Daly was wrong about the Chicago/Nashville RFAs, he could very well be wrong about this.

Paranoid Android is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 07:55 PM
  #730
Freudian
No Guenin, No cry
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 30,896
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paranoid Android View Post
Because the NHL does not have final say in the matter. Just like Daly was wrong about the Chicago/Nashville RFAs, he could very well be wrong about this.
NHLs interpretation of the rules certainly will have more weight than Jay Feasters.

Anyway, I'm starting to realize it's not particularly fruitful to discuss this with you. You have convinced yourself Jay Feaster handled this in a competent manner and there is nothing anyone can say that will convince you of the opposite. So I will not waste your or my time anymore. We'll agree to disagree, as they say.

Freudian is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 08:04 PM
  #731
Paranoid Android
ERMAHGERD
 
Paranoid Android's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 11,634
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
NHLs interpretation of the rules certainly will have more weight than Jay Feasters.

Anyway, I'm starting to realize it's not particularly fruitful to discuss this with you. You have convinced yourself Jay Feaster handled this in a competent manner and there is nothing anyone can say that will convince you of the opposite. So I will not waste your or my time anymore. We'll agree to disagree, as they say.
The NHL's interpretation of the rule has no more weight than the NHLPA's, which we haven't heard from, but would likely protect the player and side with Calgary.

Agreed. You have convinced yourself that at least 6 NHL GMs, staff, and an NHLPA rep are utterly incompetent and no amount of outside-the-box thinking will convince you otherwise.

Paranoid Android is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 08:54 PM
  #732
Haatley
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
NHLs interpretation of the rules certainly will have more weight than Jay Feasters.

Anyway, I'm starting to realize it's not particularly fruitful to discuss this with you. You have convinced yourself Jay Feaster handled this in a competent manner and there is nothing anyone can say that will convince you of the opposite. So I will not waste your or my time anymore. We'll agree to disagree, as they say.
I read other teams had sent offer sheets over as well.
And at first it was being called a great move by media. No one knew about the rule.

Haatley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:23 PM
  #733
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haatley View Post
I read other teams had sent offer sheets over as well.
And at first it was being called a great move by media. No one knew about the rule.
Oh yeah? Which ones might those be?

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:32 PM
  #734
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 19,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paranoid Android View Post
The NHL's interpretation of the rule has no more weight than the NHLPA's, which we haven't heard from, but would likely protect the player and side with Calgary.

Agreed. You have convinced yourself that at least 6 NHL GMs, staff, and an NHLPA rep are utterly incompetent and no amount of outside-the-box thinking will convince you otherwise.
I'm glad you think paying $2.5m and giving up 1st and 3rd for a, let's be generous, 50% chance of keeping O'Reilly and then getting stuck with a $6.5m QO is good GMing.

me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:43 PM
  #735
Gary83*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
I'm glad you think paying $2.5m and giving up 1st and 3rd for a, let's be generous, 50% chance of keeping O'Reilly and then getting stuck with a $6.5m QO is good GMing.
Glad you're naive enough to believe that Calgary would be the one paying compensation and not the team that ends up with acquiring O'reilly.

Gary83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 10:55 PM
  #736
skip2mybordeleau
Oh No,We Suck Again!
 
skip2mybordeleau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,450
vCash: 5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Oh yeah? Which ones might those be?
it's been widely reported there's been as many as 4 teams, but all of this is speculation this was in the calgary sun

http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/02/28...to-offer-sheet

skip2mybordeleau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 01:09 AM
  #737
Paranoid Android
ERMAHGERD
 
Paranoid Android's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 11,634
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
I'm glad you think paying $2.5m and giving up 1st and 3rd for a, let's be generous, 50% chance of keeping O'Reilly and then getting stuck with a $6.5m QO is good GMing.
I'm failing to see where I said any of that.

Paranoid Android is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 02:02 AM
  #738
benusmc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,460
vCash: 500
What in the **** is the Avs GM doing?

benusmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 01:30 PM
  #739
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 22,340
vCash: 500
I'd find it amusing if ROR and his agent were looking for something in the lines of $6/7 million per year over term (something almost "Parise-esque"), and it turned that Sherman went out and found someone to make an offer sheet for much less, and a shorter term, that they could match, lol. Avs end up looking like the "good guys" for matching so quickly, after looking like perhaps they weren't as serious as the "should have been" about retaining the services of their RFA "franchise player".

Ohashi_Jouzu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 01:50 PM
  #740
Avs_19
Peter the Great
 
Avs_19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 38,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by benusmc View Post
What in the **** is the Avs GM doing?
Keeping one of his best players instead of letting him go to a division rival for two picks.

Avs_19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 02:33 PM
  #741
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 19,269
vCash: 203
Will be interesting to see what Avs management does with O'Reilly. Will they continue playing hardball eg. ship ROR out immediately when they have a chance or try to negotiate a long-term deal. I guess lot depends on how he performs. He may take something like 5x5 contract after this one is up.

InjuredChoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 03:51 PM
  #742
ronnyweed
Registered User
 
ronnyweed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs_19 View Post
Keeping one of his best players instead of letting him go to a division rival for two picks.
If orielly was willing to sign a 2 year deal, AVs gm could have handled ths situation a lot better from the start.

Colorado could have used him during the first half of the season.

ronnyweed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 11:20 AM
  #743
cgf
Registered User
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 12,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronnyweed View Post
If orielly was willing to sign a 2 year deal, AVs gm could have handled ths situation a lot better from the start.

Colorado could have used him during the first half of the season.
Not if they don't want to have overpay for every single RFA we have. This way the kids are less likely to dig in if they and the team disagree on price, and if they do they know the only way it gets resolved is with an offer sheet.

cgf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 02:37 PM
  #744
crazyforhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,561
vCash: 500
now it turns out that Cgy didnt have their 2nd rd pick (ie traded in the cammalleri trade ???

is that correct ...wow time to clean up office in Cgy

crazyforhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 02:41 PM
  #745
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,901
vCash: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyforhockey View Post
now it turns out that Cgy didnt have their 2nd rd pick (ie traded in the cammalleri trade ???

is that correct ...wow time to clean up office in Cgy
Everyone knew this it wasn't some sort of secret.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 02:44 PM
  #746
crazyforhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHudlinator View Post
Everyone knew this it wasn't some sort of secret.
I wasnt aware of it.....how can they offer sheet when they dont have the pick...they have to trade back for it

crazyforhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 02:45 PM
  #747
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,901
vCash: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyforhockey View Post
I wasnt aware of it.....how can they offer sheet when they dont have the pick...they have to trade back for it
The offer sheet would have only given up 1st + 3rd the 2nd wasn't needed.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 03:06 PM
  #748
crazyforhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHudlinator View Post
The offer sheet would have only given up 1st + 3rd the 2nd wasn't needed.
thank you Iwas thinking 1st 2nd and thrid.....my bad

crazyforhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:45 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.