HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

O'Sullivan, Melanson, Courchaine all free agents?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-28-2005, 05:08 PM
  #1
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,278
vCash: 500
O'Sullivan, Melanson, Courchaine all free agents?

This was brought up in the Prospect Board but these prospects drafted in 2003 might seek a way to become free agents.

DAMN IT!

As if the Wild didn't have holes already and have to contend with other teams...

thestonedkoala is offline  
Old
01-28-2005, 05:32 PM
  #2
Wild Thing
Registered User
 
Wild Thing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Dark Side
Country: Germany
Posts: 6,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoobieDoobieDo
This was brought up in the Prospect Board but these prospects drafted in 2003 might seek a way to become free agents.

DAMN IT!

As if the Wild didn't have holes already and have to contend with other teams...
Those other teams aren't going to have the same problems?

Wild Thing is offline  
Old
01-28-2005, 08:18 PM
  #3
bcimright
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 89
vCash: 500
well...no one else is looking out for them right? Why can't they do what they think is best for them? If the team wanted them so bad, maybe they should have been signed them??? Why should they just silently take it up the wazoo?

bcimright is offline  
Old
01-28-2005, 08:37 PM
  #4
MePutPuckInNet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,385
vCash: 500
fo' sho', bcim.

sing it sistah!

MePutPuckInNet is offline  
Old
01-29-2005, 11:42 AM
  #5
easton122
Registered User
 
easton122's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,951
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to easton122 Send a message via MSN to easton122
Bettman guaranteed the GM's they weren't going to lose their drafted prospects...

easton122 is offline  
Old
01-29-2005, 12:40 PM
  #6
beets
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 27
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by easton122
Bettman guaranteed the GM's they weren't going to lose their drafted prospects...
for some reason i'm not very confident with that "guarantee"

beets is offline  
Old
01-30-2005, 12:00 AM
  #7
Wild Bill
Registered User
 
Wild Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,184
vCash: 500
I think all this talk of losing prospect rights is pretty funny. Who exactly are they gonna sign with if there is no NHL? Not with an NHL team, that's for sure. Yeah they could sign in Europe or Russia or the AHL, but all these fans of NHL teams thinking they are gonna be able to snatch up other team's top prospects and that it won't be covered in the new agreement are fooling themselves IMO. All the time lost when contracts could've been negotiated and players could've been making rosters...can't see it happening. The new CBA will lay out the groundwork for this and both sides will agree on it...some players may choose to fight it on grounds beyond me, but I think it will come down to: if you wanna play in the NHL, you have to play by the NHL's rules.

No CBA, no NHL. No NHL, no NHL signings. No draft, no hockey...no nothing.

*sighs*

Wild Bill is offline  
Old
01-30-2005, 07:49 PM
  #8
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
Most of 'em will lose money if they become free agents. A few top end guys might have a chance to get better deals, but I think that would be a gamble. Drafted prospects earn more money. I think it would be a big mistake, and I'd be surprised if any of them tried it. They worked so hard for so long to get drafted, and now they're going to throw that away?

ceber is offline  
Old
01-30-2005, 10:41 PM
  #9
theo6060
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,801
vCash: 500
Another thing to consider is there would be an unwritten rule among gm's not to sign other team's prospects. Kind of the way if a player re-enters the draft, no other team takes him before the same spot he was taken the first time around. Of course, Edmonton did that a few years ago when they took Jarret Stoll from the Flames. Calgary, in turn, went and took Edmonton's re-entry Matt Lombardi after Edmonton took their guy.

theo6060 is offline  
Old
01-30-2005, 11:55 PM
  #10
Ozy_Flame
Registered User
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theo6060
Another thing to consider is there would be an unwritten rule among gm's not to sign other team's prospects. Kind of the way if a player re-enters the draft, no other team takes him before the same spot he was taken the first time around. Of course, Edmonton did that a few years ago when they took Jarret Stoll from the Flames. Calgary, in turn, went and took Edmonton's re-entry Matt Lombardi after Edmonton took their guy.
And the odd thing is, both guys have worked out well for both teams. Almost seems like not only was it the first "trade" these two teams ever made, but also one of the fairest in terms of prospect value.

Ozy_Flame is offline  
Old
01-30-2005, 11:58 PM
  #11
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,278
vCash: 500
Problem is ceber, one of those big rookies is O'Sullivan and he might command a pretty buck. Courchaine, Melanson, and Bolduc I'm not worried about, O'Sully I am.

As for not taking other prospects, I think it'll be simply a free agents, kind of like RJ for the Rangers...So they'll sign where they like it...

thestonedkoala is offline  
Old
01-31-2005, 01:11 AM
  #12
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoobieDoobieDo
Problem is ceber, one of those big rookies is O'Sullivan and he might command a pretty buck.
Risky gamble. Plenty of teams were ready to pass on him entirely in the draft. Maybe some would re-think they're decision now, but maybe not. I don't think he can count on getting a good first contract as a free agent.

ceber is offline  
Old
01-31-2005, 02:10 AM
  #13
mazmin
Go! Jets! Go!
 
mazmin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velvet E. Sax
I think all this talk of losing prospect rights is pretty funny. Who exactly are they gonna sign with if there is no NHL? Not with an NHL team, that's for sure. Yeah they could sign in Europe or Russia or the AHL, but all these fans of NHL teams thinking they are gonna be able to snatch up other team's top prospects and that it won't be covered in the new agreement are fooling themselves IMO. All the time lost when contracts could've been negotiated and players could've been making rosters...can't see it happening. The new CBA will lay out the groundwork for this and both sides will agree on it...some players may choose to fight it on grounds beyond me, but I think it will come down to: if you wanna play in the NHL, you have to play by the NHL's rules.

No CBA, no NHL. No NHL, no NHL signings. No draft, no hockey...no nothing.

*sighs*
I agree with this. I'm looking forward to the next year in the AHL if the NHL doesn't have its crap together.

mazmin is offline  
Old
01-31-2005, 12:00 PM
  #14
Roger's Pancreas*
 
Roger's Pancreas*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,363
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Roger's Pancreas*
The AHL is going to be much better next year if no NHL. I'm pretty sure these prospects can still sign with the AHL clubs, and if that's the case everyone is getting worked up over nothing.

Roger's Pancreas* is offline  
Old
01-31-2005, 12:40 PM
  #15
theo6060
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,801
vCash: 500
This isn't like some fantasy hockey league where if a gm forgets to qualify his 30-year old superstar and he becomes a free agent. There's only two possible scenarios I can see where these players wouldn't sign with the teams that drafted them: 1) If the team decides he's not in their plans and tells him they're not interested in signing him anymore, 2) If the player is dumb and believes he can make more money or doesn't like the team that drafted him and refuses to sign with them. The reason is this, the NHL gm's know that what goes around comes around. So if you go sign O'Sullivan when Minnesota still wants then you're burning a bridge with a team for the rest of the time you're a gm. Especially when you consider that Bettman told the gm's they wouldn't lose these prospects: you'd have to be a pretty cold-hearted gm to go ahead and sign someone else's prospects after all that.

theo6060 is offline  
Old
01-31-2005, 02:20 PM
  #16
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 14,599
vCash: 500
Courchaine is an 84-birthdate so he'd be an UFA on June 1 even if a CBA was in place.

MS is offline  
Old
01-31-2005, 02:37 PM
  #17
NyCoN
Instant Contender
 
NyCoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes
Country: United States
Posts: 1,229
vCash: 500
I doubt the Wild would sign Courchaine even if they were playing hockey right now. Granted he's a good scorer, but his size and strength would be a major concern to me.

NyCoN is offline  
Old
01-31-2005, 03:31 PM
  #18
Monkeypox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 135
vCash: 500
On paper, Courchaine reminds me of another pretty good WHL scorer the Wild drafted but let reenter the draft, Eric Johanssen, who is a mediocre player in New Jersey's system, and was recently demoted to Augusta of the ECHL, where he is now teammates with another early Wild draft choice, Brian Passmore.

Monkeypox is offline  
Old
02-17-2005, 10:59 AM
  #19
MePutPuckInNet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,385
vCash: 500
Nothing new here really...but just thought i'd post this link:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3400860
3. What will happen to players drafted in the 2003 NHL Entry Draft?
Under the terms of the last CBA, all players drafted in the 2003 NHL Entry Draft needed to be signed by June 1, 2005 or they would go back into the 2005 draft. Unfortunately, the league has instituted a strict ban on the signing of any player contracts during the lockout.

Despite commissioner Gary Bettman being on record as saying that no NHL team will lose any prospects from the 2003 draft, many teams scrambled to signed their 2003 picks prior to the start of the lockout. On the other hand, some teams preferred to wait, thinking that new restrictions on rookie contracts would allow them to ink those kids at discount rates.

In Canada, the major junior ranks include players from 16 to 19, with a small minority continuing as overage 20-year-olds. Junior players are eligible for the draft the year they turn 18. Those who finish their junior eligibility without ever being drafted by the NHL are free agents. In Europe, leagues do not have restrictions on players in relation to the NHL draft.

Now several top junior prospects like Jeff Carter (Philadelphia), Michael Richards (Philadelphia), Eric Fehr (Washington), Patrick O'Sullivan (Minnesota) and Shawn Belle (Dallas) could go to the courts to try to win unrestricted free agency. They can argue that under the terms of the current CBA, their rights do not belong to any team as of June 1, 2005, with no junior eligibility remaining. In the absence of a draft, the courts could make them free agents.

MePutPuckInNet is offline  
Old
02-17-2005, 11:27 AM
  #20
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
I was pretty sure the problem would be resolved before that date came, but now I'm not at all sure. I think those guys should go for it (free agency). Of course, I wonder if they'd get better money by waiting and sticking with the team that drafted them. We've seen what often happens to guys who don't reach deals and re-enter the draft.

Their agents can probably give them the best advice, but as far as I'm concerned they should follow the biggest paycheck. I certainly won't hold it against 'em if they do. The PA and the League have made it very clear that NHL hockey is all about the money, so why should a group of kids be held to some different standard? Maybe I'm bitter.

ceber is offline  
Old
02-19-2005, 11:21 AM
  #21
firstroundbust
lacks explosiveness
 
firstroundbust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Parts Unknown
Country: United States
Posts: 5,641
vCash: 500
Sign O'sullivan!!!!!!!

firstroundbust is offline  
Old
02-19-2005, 01:20 PM
  #22
DW
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: MN
Posts: 927
vCash: 500
O'Sullivan is the only player that needs to be signed of the 4 prospects. The other three players seem destined for minor league duty. The only other player not signed that needs to be is Veilleux. The Wild seem to be in good shape other then O'Sullivan.

DW is offline  
Old
02-20-2005, 07:10 AM
  #23
Isles72
Registered User
 
Isles72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,866
vCash: 500
If excellent prospects like O'Sullivan ,Jeff Carter etc.. can become free agents after the deadline to sign them kicks in you would think the ''pa'' might have alot of leverage v.s the owners if this thing isnt settled by May

Isles72 is offline  
Old
02-20-2005, 04:22 PM
  #24
Roger's Pancreas*
 
Roger's Pancreas*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,363
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Roger's Pancreas*
Quote:
Originally Posted by MePutPuckInNet
Nothing new here really...but just thought i'd post this link:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3400860
3. What will happen to players drafted in the 2003 NHL Entry Draft?
Under the terms of the last CBA, all players drafted in the 2003 NHL Entry Draft needed to be signed by June 1, 2005 or they would go back into the 2005 draft. Unfortunately, the league has instituted a strict ban on the signing of any player contracts during the lockout.

Despite commissioner Gary Bettman being on record as saying that no NHL team will lose any prospects from the 2003 draft, many teams scrambled to signed their 2003 picks prior to the start of the lockout. On the other hand, some teams preferred to wait, thinking that new restrictions on rookie contracts would allow them to ink those kids at discount rates.

In Canada, the major junior ranks include players from 16 to 19, with a small minority continuing as overage 20-year-olds. Junior players are eligible for the draft the year they turn 18. Those who finish their junior eligibility without ever being drafted by the NHL are free agents. In Europe, leagues do not have restrictions on players in relation to the NHL draft.

Now several top junior prospects like Jeff Carter (Philadelphia), Michael Richards (Philadelphia), Eric Fehr (Washington), Patrick O'Sullivan (Minnesota) and Shawn Belle (Dallas) could go to the courts to try to win unrestricted free agency. They can argue that under the terms of the current CBA, their rights do not belong to any team as of June 1, 2005, with no junior eligibility remaining. In the absence of a draft, the courts could make them free agents.
That makes sense to some degree. You could argue that even if these player went to the court to win ufa, they stand to gain nothing. There would still be a rookie maximum league wide so why not just stick with the team that drafted you/needs you. I guess it has alot to do with the players general attitude and what he feels is best for his future.

Roger's Pancreas* is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 05:21 PM
  #25
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 30,078
vCash: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panasonic Youth
That makes sense to some degree. You could argue that even if these player went to the court to win ufa, they stand to gain nothing. There would still be a rookie maximum league wide so why not just stick with the team that drafted you/needs you. I guess it has alot to do with the players general attitude and what he feels is best for his future.

Bettman should let the gms know that any rookie signing bonus', will count against a cap.This would keep the deep pocketed teams from offering huge signing bonus'.

CREW99AW is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:02 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.