HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Arbitration - PA prosposes elimination of 'Walking away' from ruling

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-22-2012, 12:34 AM
  #1
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 5,365
vCash: 133
Arbitration - PA prosposes elimination of 'Walking away' from ruling

Just wanted to tackle this little tidbit from their proposal...

I think we could gather the data ourselves to determine the feasibility of whether this would be good for teams.

The process of how to do this:
- gather a recent list of players that teams have walked away from
- the contract awarded that was passed on by the team
- subsequent contract signed with his new club, and maybe the contract after that as well.
- subsequent performance of said player the following season.

- And then the subjective part - did the player's subsequent performance justify or not the team walking away from the orginal award.


Either
A- In general most of the players managed show they were deserving of their awards thru their subsequent seasons (PA proposal to eliminate the walk-away right is justified)
B- In general most of the players' subsequent seasons appeared to justify their original team's decision to walk away for the awarded contract. (PA proposal to eliminate the walk-away right would not be justified)


EDIT:
Whoa.. just found a list of walk-aways to make this very easy...

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/stor...1995-2011.html

Quote:
YEAR
PLAYER
TEAM
AWARD
PLAYER RESULT



1999

Dmitri Khristich
Boston
$2.8M
4 yrs @ 2.06M per with TOR



2003

Bryan Berard
Boston
$2.5
1 yr @ 2.01 with CHI (after season started)



2004

Cory Stillman
Tampa Bay
$3.9
3 yrs with CAR



2006

David Tanabe
Boston
$1.275
1 yr @ 900K with CAR



2006

J.P. Dumont
Buffalo
$2.9
2 yrs @ 2.25 per with NAS



2009

Nikolai Zherdev
Rangers
$3.9
Signs with KHL club



2010

Tim Kennedy
Buffalo
$1
1 yr @ 550K with NYR, forced to accept 2-way deal with FLA in 2011



2010

Clarke MacArthur
Atlanta
$2.4
1 yr @ 1.1 M with TOR, new 2-year deal in 2011



2010

Antti Niemi
Chicago
$2.75
1 yr @ 2M with SJ, new 4-yr deal just months later

So whats the verdict?

DL44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 12:41 AM
  #2
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 5,365
vCash: 133
After realizing the frequency at which 'walking away' occurs, this is NOT an important point of the CBA process...

But in general, it does appear teams were for the most part justified for walking away...

Stillman and MacArther stand out to the contrary.

DL44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 03:47 AM
  #3
RainbowDash
20% Cooler
 
RainbowDash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Equestria
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Niemi benefited the most.

Then again, they like him very much in SJ, so they also benefited from it.

I would not say that Chicago was better off walking away. They have a goaltender problem since then.

RainbowDash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 04:53 AM
  #4
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,288
vCash: 500
I don't like the PA's stance on this, and I do wonder how serious they are on this subject...

A GM has to operate under a cap. And many does not have alot of room to work with. Then all of a sudden you end up with a player getting a 3-4m raise, that you have no interest to pay for, and nobody else either I guess in some cases.

I think it also can fire back at the players. Like seriously, I think a coach/GM could match a player diffrently if they fear that he could end up with a contarct in the summer that could really hurt the team. If you have a D that you think is a 2m D, you have 4m of cap space and need to resign 3 players of which one you think is really important and that you absolutely not want to loose, do you play the said D on the PP if you think he could get 35 pts from it and close to 3-4m in arbitration when you can't walk away from that award in an emergency?

Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 08:28 AM
  #5
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
I think this would result in many players not getting an QO. A player withough a QO cannot go to arbitration. And in most cases teams won't have to fear an offer sheet.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 10:10 AM
  #6
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
I think this would result in many players not getting an QO. A player withough a QO cannot go to arbitration. And in most cases teams won't have to fear an offer sheet.
If a player doesn't get a QO they become a free agent on July 1st.

mouser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 11:08 AM
  #7
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
If a player doesn't get a QO they become a free agent on July 1st.
That's what the Pens did with Kennedy. They did no send him a QO so it had not arbitration rights and the Pens didn't have to be scared of an offer sheet. Obviously, it doesn't work with star players.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 11:52 AM
  #8
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
That's what the Pens did with Kennedy. They did no send him a QO so it had not arbitration rights and the Pens didn't have to be scared of an offer sheet. Obviously, it doesn't work with star players.
this is false, given that every team could actually send him an offer sheet. the only difference is that the Pens wouldn't have to match (but also wouldn't be allowed to match without Kennedy's approval even if they wanted to).

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 12:20 PM
  #9
Pinchy
Registered User
 
Pinchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DL44 View Post
After realizing the frequency at which 'walking away' occurs, this is NOT an important point of the CBA process...

But in general, it does appear teams were for the most part justified for walking away...

Stillman and MacArther stand out to the contrary.
The Thrashers never argued against MacArthur in his arbitration hearing. Essentially, the arbitrator only had one side of the argument to consider (MacArthur's) and gave him exactly what he was asking for.

The Thrashers were never planning to match anyways, so they walked away and the Leafs ended up taking a flyer on him for one year.

edit:

Here is a pretty good article summing up what happened with MacArthur. Essentially, the Thrashers wanted to make sure he was awarded MINIMUM $1.6 million so they could walk away, so they never challenged the arbitration.

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...ration-system/

Pinchy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2012, 12:24 PM
  #10
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 5,365
vCash: 133
It appears to me to be just a minor right the players have added that they may be willing to concede when the chips are down.

The frequency just doesn't warrant a fight either way - players or owners really.

But almost in each case, the player winning arbitration was forced to sign for less.. so the attempt to protect players is the motivation here regardless of whether the arbitrator got it right or not.

DL44 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 02:34 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.