HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Why would Justin Schultz not re-enter the draft?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-05-2012, 02:30 AM
  #1
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
Why would Justin Schultz not re-enter the draft?

There has been much talk surrounding Justin Schultz, and I'm curious why he isn't eligible to re-enter the draft.

Article 8.4 of the CBA concerns draft eligibility, and reads as follows:

Quote:
8.4 Eligibility for Claim.

(a) All Players age 18 or older are eligible for claim in the Entry Draft, except:

(i) a Player on the Reserve List of a Club, other than as a try-out;
(ii) a Player who has been claimed in two prior Entry Drafts;
(iii) a Player who previously played in the League and became a Free Agent pursuant to this Agreement;
(iv) a Player age 21 or older who: (A) has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft and (B) played hockey for at least one season in North America when he was age 18, 19, or 20 and shall be
eligible to enter the League as an Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 10.1(d); and
(v) a Player age 22 or older who has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft and shall be eligible to enter the League as an Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 10.1(d).
That would seem to suggest he's eligible for claim in the draft, but to counter that it's been widely reported he'll be a UFA - anyone know why? I suppose there could be some amendment made since the CBA was published that isn't publicly available?

Any help would be appreciated, thanks in advance!

speeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 02:53 AM
  #2
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Well, Section 8.4 a-iv somewhat covers why he wouldn't re-enter the draft; he's too old.
It talks about players that had been previously unclaimed, but it also applies to players that have been selected:
Quote:
Entry Draft Eligibility
All players age 19 or older [(i) any player who will be age 18 on or before September 15 in the year in which such Entry Draft is held, or (ii) reaches his 19th birthday between September 16 and December 31, both dates included, next following Entry Draft, can attain eligibility by delivering to the League a written notice (Opt in Form) prior to the later of May 1, or seven days following the date such player finishes competing on his team in the year in which such draft is to be held.] are eligible for claim in the Entry Draft, except:
(i) A Player on the Reserve List of a Club, other than as a try-out;
(ii) A player who has been claimed in two prior Entry Drafts;
(iii) A player who previously played in the League and became a free agent pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Agreement;
(iv) A player age 21 or older who had played hockey for at least one season in North America when he was age 18, 19 or 20
http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26377

The loophole he is using is not something that can be used by someone younger than 21 because of the way it works though, so it would be impossible for someone taking advantage of it to re-enter the draft.
Section 8.6 c-iv:
Quote:
(iv) If a Player drafted at age 18 or 19, who had received a Bona Fide Offer in accordance with Section 8.6(a)(ii) above, becomes a bona fide college student prior to the second June 1 following his selection in the Entry Draft and does not remain a bona fide college student through the graduation of his college class, his drafting Club shall retain exclusive rights for the negotiation of his services until the fourth June 1 following his selection in the Entry Draft.
Basically, if a player is selected in the draft and does not become a collegiate player during the season immediately following the draft (they can do so by staying in junior A, which Schultz did), they can choose to drop out of school four years after they were selected and go to free agency, which is what Schultz may do.

jfb392 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 06:17 AM
  #3
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,723
vCash: 500
There seems to be some debate about when JS could sign an SPC. The MSN is suggesting that he would be a FA on June 1 (which I think is clear) but that he could not sign and SPC until July 1. The sited examle seems to be the case of Blake Wheeler with this article suggesting that this is the case.

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/...gn_up_wheeler/

Yet when I read this

Quote:
(d) Draft Related Unrestricted Free Agents.
(i) Any Player not eligible for claim in any future Entry Draft
pursuant to this Agreement and not on a Club's Reserve List shall
be an Unrestricted Free Agent.
Further, any Player eligible for
claim in the Entry Draft, but who was unclaimed, shall be an
Unrestricted Free Agent subject to the provisions of Section 8.9(b).
(ii) Each Player referred to in subsection (d)(i) above shall, during the
period of his Free Agency in accordance with Section 8.9(b), if
applicable, be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with
any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and
sign an SPC with such Player, without penalty or restriction
subject to the provisions of Article 9 of this Agreement, if
applicable, and without being subject to any Right of First Refusal,
Draft Choice Compensation or any other compensation or
equalization obligation of any kind.
the language seems quite clear that he could sign once he becomes a UFA. The only issue I can see is the role of Section 8.9(b), which does not apply in this case.
in this.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 08:04 AM
  #4
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
Well, Section 8.4 a-iv somewhat covers why he wouldn't re-enter the draft; he's too old.
It talks about players that had been previously unclaimed, but it also applies to players that have been selected:

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26377

The loophole he is using is not something that can be used by someone younger than 21 because of the way it works though, so it would be impossible for someone taking advantage of it to re-enter the draft.
Is there a way to tell when that page was posted by the nhl? I thought the "opt in" stuff changed with the new (well, now almost finished) CBA, could that page be old enough that it refers to the old CBA?

speeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 08:16 AM
  #5
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
If it's at all debatable whether he's draft eligible, I'd be kind of surprised if some team doesn't try to claim him in the draft, and then just go through whatever arbitration or appeal process might exist.

EDM tried to draft an ineligible player awhile ago, FLA tried to draft Ovechkin a year early, if someone thinks they have a chance at getting Schultz, and he can't/doesn't sign by the draft, I wouldn't be surprised if someone would gamble a late round pick trying to acquire him.

speeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 08:23 AM
  #6
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds View Post
Is there a way to tell when that page was posted by the nhl? I thought the "opt in" stuff changed with the new (well, now almost finished) CBA, could that page be old enough that it refers to the old CBA?
For clarification...

There is only one CBA, the one that has been active for almost seven years. Those are the current rules, and they do not expire until 15 September.

From what we understand, there is no "well, now almost finished" CBA. The players and ownership are to sit down after the SCPlayoffs to hammer out a new deal.

Grudy0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 08:32 AM
  #7
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
For clarification...

There is only one CBA, the one that has been active for almost seven years. Those are the current rules, and they do not expire until 15 September.

From what we understand, there is no "well, now almost finished" CBA. The players and ownership are to sit down after the SCPlayoffs to hammer out a new deal.
When I wrote "new" CBA, I was referring to the current CBA, "old" referring to the pre-2004 CBA. I wasn't making reference to the upcoming CBA negotiations.

speeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 10:50 AM
  #8
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
Hmmm, not sure the interpretation is correct here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
Well, Section 8.4 a-iv somewhat covers why he wouldn't re-enter the draft; he's too old.
Your quote is wrong -- it's a quote from the 1994 CBA, not sure why it's still on the NHL's website. It applied to Wheeler but doesn't apply to Schultz. speeds correctly quotes the 2005 CBA. 8.4(a)(iv) states:

"(iv) a Player age 21 or older who: (A) has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft and (B) played hockey for at least one season in North America when he was age 18, 19, or 20 and shall be eligible to enter the League as an Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 10.1(d)"

Bolded part was missing from your quote and was added in 2005. Schultz was selectd in 2008 so (iv) cannot apply to him, and neither of the other 4 exceptions in 8.4(a) do either. Unless I'm mistaken, he's draft-eligible using that article.

Your other quote -- 8.6(d)(iv) -- is correct, but IMO your interpretation is incorrect: it says Anaheim holds Schultz's rights until June 1. It doesn't say he becomes a UFA once those rights expire. He'd need to become a UFA under 10.1(d)(i) (Fourier's quote), which in my understanding doesn't apply because he's still draft-eligible. So honestly I'm not convinced.

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 11:06 AM
  #9
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds View Post
Is there a way to tell when that page was posted by the nhl? I thought the "opt in" stuff changed with the new (well, now almost finished) CBA, could that page be old enough that it refers to the old CBA?
The Article 8.4 posted by speed is from the current CBA.

The excerpt posted by jfb392 from the nhl.com link is ancient - it is from the old, pre-Lockout, 1995 CBA. It is completely replaced by the current CBA. All 18 yos are eligible and no longer have to opt in and the age out requirements are qualified by "has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old 1995 CBA Article 8.4
8.4. Eligibility for Claim.

(a) All players age 19 or older are eligible for claim in the Entry Draft, except:
(i) a player on the Reserve List of a Club, other than as a Try-Out;

(ii) a player who has been claimed in two prior Entry Drafts;

(iii) a player who previously played in the League and became a free agent pursuant to
this Agreement;

(iv) a player age 21 or older who played hockey for at least one season in North
America when he was age 18, 19 or 20.
(b) In addition to the players referred to in sub-paragraph (a), any player who (i) will be
age 18 on or before September 15 in the year in which such Entry Draft is held, or (ii) reaches his 19th
birthday between September 16 and December 31, both dates included, next following the Entry Draft
and who in either case wishes to become eligible for selection in the Entry Draft, can attain eligibility by
delivering to the League a written notice in the form of Exhibit 3 hereto prior to the later of (A) May 1,
or (B) seven days following the date such player finishes competing on his team in the year in which such
draft is to be held.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Current 2005 CBA Article 8.4
8.4 Eligibility for Claim.
(a) All Players age 18 or older are eligible for claim in the Entry Draft,
except:
(i) a Player on the Reserve List of a Club, other than as a try-out;

(ii) a Player who has been claimed in two prior Entry Drafts;

(iii) a Player who previously played in the League and became a Free
Agent pursuant to this Agreement;

(iv) a Player age 21 or older who: (A) has not been selected in a
previous Entry Draft and (B) played hockey for at least one season
in North America when he was age 18, 19, or 20 and shall be
eligible to enter the League as an Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant
to Article 10.1(d); and

(v) a Player age 22 or older who has not been selected in a previous
Entry Draft and shall be eligible to enter the League as an
Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 10.1(d).

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 11:15 AM
  #10
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
thanks kdb, so why wouldn't he be draft-eligible? how is everybody saying he's a UFA?

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 11:18 AM
  #11
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The Article 8.4 posted by speed is from the current CBA.

The excerpt posted by jfb392 from the nhl.com link is ancient - it is from the old, pre-Lockout, 1995 CBA. It is completely replaced by the current CBA. All 18 yos are eligible and no longer have to opt in and the age out requirements are qualified by "has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft".
So what's your take kbd? Does Schultz have to go back into the draft? If so that throws a monkey wrench in the whole thing.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 11:50 AM
  #12
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
thanks kdb, so why wouldn't he be draft-eligible? how is everybody saying he's a UFA?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
So what's your take kbd? Does Schultz have to go back into the draft? If so that throws a monkey wrench in the whole thing.
The only explanation I can come up with is that because Schultz returned to the BCHL for a year after his draft (2008) before enrolling at U of W (2009) - or he might have actually enrolled on paper in 2008-09 - he might be considered officially (as far as the school is concerned) as part of the 2012 graduating class (even though he has one more year of NCAA eligibility). In that case, the Ducks would hold his rights until 8/15 - since he would have remained "a bona fide college student through the graduation of his college class".

Quote:
(iii) If a Player drafted at age 18 or 19, who had received a Bona Fide
Offer in accordance with Section 8.6(a)(ii) above, becomes a bona
fide college student prior to the second June 1 following his
selection in the Entry Draft and remains a bona fide college student
through the graduation of his college class
, his drafting Club shall
retain the exclusive rights of negotiation for his services through
and including the August 15 following the graduation of his
college class
.
Then he would be eligible to become a UFA, since:

1. He would not be draft eligible under 8.4 since he would still be on the Ducks Reserve List at the time of the draft.

Quote:
(a) All Players age 18 or older are eligible for claim in the Entry Draft,
except:
(i) a Player on the Reserve List of a Club, other than as a try-out;
2. He would be eligible to play in the NHL under Article 8.9(a):

Quote:
8.9 Eligibility for Play in the League. No Player shall be eligible for play in the
League unless he:
(a) had been claimed in the last Entry Draft, or was ineligible for claim under
Section 8.4
; or

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 11:52 AM
  #13
chasespace
Registered User
 
chasespace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Williston, FL
Posts: 4,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
thanks kdb, so why wouldn't he be draft-eligible? how is everybody saying he's a UFA?
If I'm reading everything correctly there is a loophole in place that allows college players who have been drafted to leave school early and refuse to sign an offer from their drafted team and they would then be a FA on July 1st.

Blake Wheeler did the same thing(left Phoenix for Boston).

chasespace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 01:31 PM
  #14
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chasespace View Post
If I'm reading everything correctly there is a loophole in place that allows college players who have been drafted to leave school early and refuse to sign an offer from their drafted team and they would then be a FA on July 1st.

Blake Wheeler did the same thing(left Phoenix for Boston).
Wheelers case is different, as he was drafted under the rules of the old CBA - an NCAA player could leave early, and if not signed within 30 days could become a UFA if they were no longer draft eligible.

Quote:
GLENDALE, ARIZONA – Phoenix Coyotes General Manager Don Maloney announced today that Blake Wheeler, selected by the Coyotes in the 2004 Entry Draft, has rejected the Coyotes contract offer and will become an unrestricted free agent.

“We offered Blake a contract which was both commensurate with his draft position and far exceeded any guaranteed contract he can receive, under the current CBA, with any other team,” said Maloney. “He has decided, however, that becoming a free agent is in his best interest.

“We are very happy with the compensatory pick we will receive for Blake not signing, which will be the fifth pick in the second round. This is a very deep draft and we now have five picks in the first two rounds, which is very exciting.”

Under terms of the previous Collective Bargaining Agreement, which Wheeler was drafted under, any player who does not remain a college player through the graduation of his applicable class (in this case 2009), must submit a letter stating his intention to turn professional. Upon submission of that letter, the drafting club shall have 30 days to sign the player. If the player and team cannot reach an agreement within that 30 day period, the player becomes a free agent. Wheeler submitted his letter of intention to turn professional on May 8.

Wheeler’s agent informed Maloney of his decision to turn down the Coyotes contract offer and become a free agent on May 28.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 01:42 PM
  #15
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The only explanation I can come up with is that because Schultz returned to the BCHL for a year after his draft (2008) before enrolling at U of W (2009) - or he might have actually enrolled on paper in 2008-09 - he might be considered officially (as far as the school is concerned) as part of the 2012 graduating class (even though he has one more year of NCAA eligibility). In that case, the Ducks would hold his rights until 8/15 - since he would have remained "a bona fide college student through the graduation of his college class".
My guess:

If Schultz stays in school the Ducks would hold his rights until 8/15 of 2013 -- his senior season.

However if Schultz leaves school the Ducks right would expire on June 1st of 2012.

If Schultz left school between June 1st and the Draft he would be eligible to be drafted again. If Schultz waits until after the Draft to officially leave school he would immediately be a UFA and meets the eligible to play in the NHL standard.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 01:42 PM
  #16
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
Hmmm, not sure the interpretation is correct here.



Your quote is wrong -- it's a quote from the 1994 CBA, not sure why it's still on the NHL's website. It applied to Wheeler but doesn't apply to Schultz. speeds correctly quotes the 2005 CBA. 8.4(a)(iv) states:

"(iv) a Player age 21 or older who: (A) has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft and (B) played hockey for at least one season in North America when he was age 18, 19, or 20 and shall be eligible to enter the League as an Unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 10.1(d)"

Bolded part was missing from your quote and was added in 2005. Schultz was selectd in 2008 so (iv) cannot apply to him, and neither of the other 4 exceptions in 8.4(a) do either. Unless I'm mistaken, he's draft-eligible using that article.

Your other quote -- 8.6(d)(iv) -- is correct, but IMO your interpretation is incorrect: it says Anaheim holds Schultz's rights until June 1. It doesn't say he becomes a UFA once those rights expire. He'd need to become a UFA under 10.1(d)(i) (Fourier's quote), which in my understanding doesn't apply because he's still draft-eligible. So honestly I'm not convinced.
Well, I used the first quote to try to prove that there is an age limit on the draft.
I can't seem to find one that is defined in the CBA, as they qualify both the North American and European limits with "has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft".
I believe that if a North American player is 21 or a European player is 22 (according to the definition of age in Section 8.10), they are no longer eligible for the draft.
Since Schultz is already 21, turning 22 in July, he can't re-enter the draft.

10.1 d-i says that he will become an unrestricted free agent on June 1st because if he chooses to become a free agent using 8.6 c-iv, Anaheim loses his exclusive negotiating rights on June 1st.
He's no longer eligible for the draft and would no longer be on a team's reserve list, so he'd be an unrestricted free agent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
There seems to be some debate about when JS could sign an SPC. The MSN is suggesting that he would be a FA on June 1 (which I think is clear) but that he could not sign and SPC until July 1. The sited examle seems to be the case of Blake Wheeler with this article suggesting that this is the case.

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/...gn_up_wheeler/

Yet when I read this



the language seems quite clear that he could sign once he becomes a UFA. The only issue I can see is the role of Section 8.9(b), which does not apply in this case.
in this.
I believe the part of the CBA you'd be looking for would be Section 50.8 d:
Quote:
(d) No Club or Player may enter into an SPC that does not cover at least the then-current League Year. The foregoing does not apply to an SPC entered into pursuant to Section 50.5(f) [refers to contract extensions] above, or to Unsigned Draft Choices or Draft Related Unrestricted Free Agents, who shall be permitted to sign an SPC during the period from March 1 through June 1 immediately preceding the League Year in which such SPC is to take effect.
If Schultz decided to go this route, he would not be removed from Anaheim's reserve list until he failed to sign with them on June 1st (5:00PM EST), so he'd become a free agent on June 2nd, which is outside of that window.
That means that he'd have to wait until the new League Year began on July 1st to officially sign a contract.
They could agree on terms prior, but the actual contract could not be signed until the beginning of a new League Year.
The definition of "League Year", according to Section 1:
Quote:
"League Year" means the period from July 1 of one calendar year to and including June 30 of the following calendar year or such other one year period to which the NHL and the NHLPA may agree.

jfb392 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 01:45 PM
  #17
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Wheelers case is different, as he was drafted under the rules of the old CBA - an NCAA player could leave early, and if not signed within 30 days could become a UFA if they were no longer draft eligible.
Actually I think Wheeler is the same situation. He was drafted under the old CBA, however the Article 8 college player rules were applied retroactively. The only grandfathering option he had to my recollection is the higher rookie salary and bonus scales.

Quote:
CBA Exhibit 16(i) For Unsigned Draft Choices in college who were drafted in the 2004 Entry Draft
or before (or who subsequently became bona fide college students since being
drafted), such Players will be subject to the Article 8 provisions governing college
players. For Unsigned Draft Choices who were drafted from college, but who
have subsequently left college and announced a commitment to play hockey
elsewhere in North America or Europe, a Club's exclusive negotiating rights to
such Players will automatically be extended through and including June 1, 2007.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 02:26 PM
  #18
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
Well, I used the first quote to try to prove that there is an age limit on the draft.
I can't seem to find one that is defined in the CBA, as they qualify both the North American and European limits with "has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft".
I believe that if a North American player is 21 or a European player is 22 (according to the definition of age in Section 8.10), they are no longer eligible for the draft.
Since Schultz is already 21, turning 22 in July, he can't re-enter the draft.

10.1 d-i says that he will become an unrestricted free agent on June 1st because if he chooses to become a free agent using 8.6 c-iv, Anaheim loses his exclusive negotiating rights on June 1st.
He's no longer eligible for the draft and would no longer be on a team's reserve list, so he'd be an unrestricted free agent.
It's pretty clear from the 2005 CBA 8.4(a) that a North American 21 or older can reenter the draft if he has been drafted before. The 21 or older age limit only applies to players who were never drafted. Therefore 10.1(d) doesn't apply because he is still draft-eligible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
My guess:

If Schultz stays in school the Ducks would hold his rights until 8/15 of 2013 -- his senior season.

However if Schultz leaves school the Ducks right would expire on June 1st of 2012.

If Schultz left school between June 1st and the Draft he would be eligible to be drafted again. If Schultz waits until after the Draft to officially leave school he would immediately be a UFA and meets the eligible to play in the NHL standard.
I don't think that's correct -- the Ducks no longer holding his rights according to 8.6(c) doesn't imply he becomes a UFA. What it says is that he's no longer on the team's reserve list, and therefore the player must now re-enter the draft unless he satisfies one of 8.4(a)(ii)-(v). Schultz is none of that and, it appears, Wheeler wasn't either given the quote you provided, so there must be another way to read the situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The only explanation I can come up with is that because Schultz returned to the BCHL for a year after his draft (2008) before enrolling at U of W (2009) - or he might have actually enrolled on paper in 2008-09 - he might be considered officially (as far as the school is concerned) as part of the 2012 graduating class (even though he has one more year of NCAA eligibility). In that case, the Ducks would hold his rights until 8/15 - since he would have remained "a bona fide college student through the graduation of his college class".

Then he would be eligible to become a UFA, since:

1. He would not be draft eligible under 8.4 since he would still be on the Ducks Reserve List at the time of the draft.


2. He would be eligible to play in the NHL under Article 8.9(a):
I shouldn't be questioning your CBA interpretation but:

Quote:
10.1(d)(i) Any Player not eligible for claim in any future Entry Draft pursuant to this Agreement and not on a Club's Reserve List shall be an Unrestricted Free Agent. Further, any Player eligible for claim in the Entry Draft, but who was unclaimed, shall be an
Unrestricted Free Agent subject to the provisions of Section 8.9(b).
On August 15, wouldn't Schultz then be eligible in a future draft according to 8.4(a)? Over 18 (general), no longer on a reserve list (i), not claimed twice (ii), hasn't played in the league (iii), did not go undrafted until 21/22 (iv+v)? The Ducks would no longer hold his rights but he still wouldn't be a UFA. He wouldn't have been draft-eligible in 2012 but would be in 2013??

I'm still confused I guess

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 02:35 PM
  #19
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
I don't think that's correct -- the Ducks no longer holding his rights according to 8.6(c) doesn't imply he becomes a UFA. What it says is that he's no longer on the team's reserve list, and therefore the player must now re-enter the draft unless he satisfies one of 8.4(a)(ii)-(v). Schultz is none of that and, it appears, Wheeler wasn't either given the quote you provided, so there must be another way to read the situation.
In the scenario I describe where Schultz leaves school after the draft.

- Ducks lose his rights immediately. His leaving school sets the period the Ducks retain his rights to June 1st 2012, which is in the past.

- He satisfies 8.4(a)(i) -- he was on the Ducks reserve list at the time of the draft. Which means he satisfies 8.9(a) and is eligible to play in the NHL. He can thus be signed as a free agent.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 02:47 PM
  #20
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
In the scenario I describe where Schultz leaves school after the draft.

- Ducks lose his rights immediately. His leaving school sets the period the Ducks retain his rights to June 1st 2012, which is in the past.

- He satisfies 8.4(a)(i) -- he was on the Ducks reserve list at the time of the draft. Which means he satisfies 8.9(a) and is eligible to play in the NHL. He can thus be signed as a free agent.
Eligible to play does not imply UFA. 10.1(d)(i) would still not apply to him.

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 02:47 PM
  #21
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,830
vCash: 500
One thing worth pointing out: this will be the third player to exploit the 2005 CBA loophole that I'm aware of:

Blake Wheeler
Jason Gregoire
Justin Schultz

What do they all have in common? Each of them played a season in the USHL or lower juniors after being drafted and before starting college.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 02:50 PM
  #22
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
One thing worth pointing out: this will be the third player to exploit the 2005 CBA loophole that I'm aware of:

Blake Wheeler
Jason Gregoire
Justin Schultz

What do they all have in common? Each of them played a season in the USHL or lower juniors after being drafted and before starting college.
..which clearly points to 8.6(c)(iv), but I'm still trying to figure out why "team loses player's rights" would imply "player becomes UFA" given how clearly 10.1(d) is phrased.

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 02:51 PM
  #23
Noreaster96
Registered User
 
Noreaster96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
One thing worth pointing out: this will be the third player to exploit the 2005 CBA loophole that I'm aware of:

Blake Wheeler
Jason Gregoire
Justin Schultz

What do they all have in common? Each of them played a season in the USHL or lower juniors after being drafted and before starting college.
I think Blake Kessel did this to the Isles too

Noreaster96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 03:07 PM
  #24
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,723
vCash: 500
Well I have now learned is that what I though was true was not, or maybe it was, or maybe no one knows if it was true..........???

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2012, 03:16 PM
  #25
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,509
vCash: 500
Mouser's theory seems the most likely explanation. He officially dis-enrolls after the Draft - he is not draft eligible in 2012 (as he is still Ducks property), is then immediately removed from the Ducks Reserve List, and seems to be eligible under 8.9(a). As long as we can ignore 10.1(d) - which Bill Sweatt implies we can do - we may have a winner.

Looking at the other cases which have come up in the Schultz thread discussions.

1. Blake Wheeler. I agree that Exhibit 16 seems to apply the current Article 8 conditions, but contemporaneous reporting from 2008 mention that he left school, requested an SPC from the 'Yotes, and became a UFA after the 30 day window - following the terms of the old CBA. Although, that could have just been sloppy reporting. He does follow the pattern of Schultz and Gregoire, playing a year in High School / Juniors before matriculating.

2. Bill Sweatt. He remained a bona fide student through graduation and became a UFA on 8/15 after the Leafs failed to sign him. He signed with the 'Nucks on 8/16. This seems to shoot down the Article 10.1(d) requirement that the player be no longer draft eligible when becoming a UFA. Sweatt would still have been draft eligible under 8.4 if he hadn't signed.

3. Jason Gregoire. The most similar case to Schultz. He played a year in the USHL after being drafted in 2007 before enrolling at UND. He left after 3 years and signed with Winnipeg on July 7, 2011.

10.1(d)(1) could be interpreted as "all players who are no longer draft eligible are UFAs" and not as "the only players who are UFAs are those who are no longer draft eligible".


Last edited by kdb209: 04-05-2012 at 03:25 PM.
kdb209 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 02:57 AM.

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.