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.

Melnyk officially files grievance against Heatley (Update - Settled - Post #125)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-03-2009, 09:55 AM
  #1
Alfredsson11
Registered User
 
Alfredsson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,940
vCash: 500
Melnyk officially files grievance against Heatley (Update - Settled - Post #125)

http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hock.../11611141.html

Quote:
“I don’t think Melnyk really expects to get his money back,” said a league executive. “I do think he wants to cause Heatley some hardship because he caused plenty of problems for the Senators in the summer.”
Quote:
Sources say Melnyk contends in the paperwork filed at the NHL’s New York headquarters, that Heatley’s camp — including agents J.P. Barry and Stacey McAlpine — gave the Senators permission to speak with the Oilers and the two-time, 50-goal scorer should have accepted the deal to Edmonton.

Quote:
“He doesn’t like to lose. He’s going to have to be patient here because this could take a while and there is some merit to his case,” said a league executive. “Something like this could take two years to be worked out. I’m not sure this will bother Heatley, though.”
Quote:
Once the Edmonton deal died, Senators GM Bryan Murray found it difficult to put another trade together. The Senators decided they had to make a deal when Heatley showed up for training camp defiant and unwilling to bend onhis demand. The league executive said there’s a chance the Sharks could be forced to pay the bonus back to Melnyk if he wins his grievance. San Jose made an offer for Heatley at the NHL draft in June, but only wanted to complete the deal on July 2 — after the bonus had been paid

Alfredsson11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 10:31 AM
  #2
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 20,876
vCash: 500
He should have done that when Heatley was still a Sen. They should have let him rot, not trade him and suspend him. And then sue his butt.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 11:10 AM
  #3
Alfredsson11
Registered User
 
Alfredsson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimoGionta View Post
He should have done that when Heatley was still a Sen. They should have let him rot, not trade him and suspend him. And then sue his butt.
Yeah, and leave a 50 goal scorer out of your lineup. Makes sense.

Alfredsson11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 11:58 AM
  #4
Cirris
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Crackport
Country: United States
Posts: 2,565
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Cirris
Here is a novel concept for all you GM/owners out there. If you don't like the fact that a player used his rights in a contract to deny a trade, how about not signing said player to a contract that gives him that right, I.E. the no movement clause you agreed to?

There's nothing in this that I see going anywhere. In the end i see this costing Melnyk more money because Heatley's agent will probably make him pay for all the legal fees for wasting everyone's time.

Cirris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:03 PM
  #5
Alfredsson11
Registered User
 
Alfredsson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,940
vCash: 500
Bill Daly indicated in the summer that Melynk has a good case.

Alfredsson11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:06 PM
  #6
CBJenga
Registered User
 
CBJenga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfredsson11 View Post
Bill Daly indicated in the summer that Melynk has a good case.
Based on what? Heatly exercised a right that his contract gave him. Sucks that the Sens had to eat the cost (among other bad things about the situation, but that's the relevant one here), but they couldn't find a team that wanted him (at their price) before THEY were the ones on the hook for $4mil. I don't really understand where a case comes from.



To me, it does seem more like a power play to punish Heatley and distract him from playing hockey.

CBJenga is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:07 PM
  #7
Wetcoaster
Registered User
 
Wetcoaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 53,194
vCash: 500
The simple fact remains under the CBA Heatley had a no movement clause and he did not waive it.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:16 PM
  #8
finchster
Registered User
 
finchster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Belgorod
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 7,239
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to finchster
I think if you ask to be traded that should waive your no movement clause and a team can send you anywhere.

If you get a no movement clause in your contract that should protect you from the team moving you against your will, not against deciding where you get moved to

finchster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:27 PM
  #9
PotaGuitar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 983
vCash: 500
Extremely tired of continually hearing about the Heatley drama when both parties should have moved on by now.

If any good comes out of this whole episode, hopefully its that GM's won't hand out NTC's like candy from now on.

PotaGuitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:27 PM
  #10
snaggle toof
Registered User
 
snaggle toof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by finchster View Post
I think if you ask to be traded that should waive your no movement clause and a team can send you anywhere.

If you get a no movement clause in your contract that should protect you from the team moving you against your will, not against deciding where you get moved to

Well the way it works right now that is just not the case, besides a team does not have to offer a NTC, but if they do offer it, they had better be prepared to deal with any potential situations that arise.

snaggle toof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:29 PM
  #11
CBJenga
Registered User
 
CBJenga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by finchster View Post
I think if you ask to be traded that should waive your no movement clause and a team can send you anywhere.
So the org could just spite the player and dump them somewhere terrible that they don't want to go? We don't know why Heatley wanted out (there's speculation and the answer to the media, but that could be not the real reason).

But let's step back and look at someone who is very unhappy with a new coach (a situation out of their control) and asks to be traded while they have a NMC. We can reasonably assume they asked for the NMC because they liked the organization, now they don't. The NMC was to control the organization they played for, should they lose that ability because the organization changed? I think that the players intent on a NMC is reasonable, and that GMs shouldn't be seeing them as a 1 mil (or whatever) discount with no cost to the ownership. It means that the player has given up some salary to reclaim some control of their destiny.

The lesson from this situation should be that GM should be much more careful about handing out NTC/NMC. Not that the clauses should be neutered to be more owner friendly.

CBJenga is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:33 PM
  #12
SpinTheBlackCircle
Global Moderator
It's time!
 
SpinTheBlackCircle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,763
vCash: 500
Ironic how after the Sens bent over Hossa in trading him for Heatley that they act SHOCKED at how Heatley treated them.

__________________
Gots all my pertinence on it and such
SpinTheBlackCircle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 12:45 PM
  #13
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild GM View Post
Ironic how after the Sens bent over Hossa in trading him for Heatley that they act SHOCKED at how Heatley treated them.
You do know it was not murray who made that move.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:09 PM
  #14
KT7
Registered User
 
KT7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild GM View Post
Ironic how after the Sens bent over Hossa in trading him for Heatley that they act SHOCKED at how Heatley treated them.
Not sure if you already know this, but there's quite a bit of difference between the two scenarios.

But hey, whatever logic you'd like to twist.

KT7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:09 PM
  #15
hfboardsuser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJenga View Post
To me, it does seem more like a power play to punish Heatley and distract him from playing hockey.
Yes, everything is a giant conspiracy meant to hurt the Sharks... never mind that it's pretty clear Heatley gamed the NTC system to ensure he wound up in San Jose.

Mod: deleted.


Last edited by Fugu: 11-03-2009 at 10:50 PM. Reason: OT
hfboardsuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:23 PM
  #16
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by finchster View Post
I think if you ask to be traded that should waive your no movement clause and a team can send you anywhere.

If you get a no movement clause in your contract that should protect you from the team moving you against your will, not against deciding where you get moved to
well I hate to break it to you, but the reason it is there is so the player can decide where he wants to play.

Fish on The Sand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:26 PM
  #17
MGorgon
Registered User
 
MGorgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 568
vCash: 500
I think the important thing people are forgetting here is that Heatley allowed Ottawa to discuss a trade with the Oilers. In denying that trade, he was just screwing with the Sens, nothing to defend there.

In my opinion, THAT is what makes him a ******* here.

MGorgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:36 PM
  #18
Jedrik
Registered User
 
Jedrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirris View Post
Here is a novel concept for all you GM/owners out there. If you don't like the fact that a player used his rights in a contract to deny a trade, how about not signing said player to a contract that gives him that right, I.E. the no movement clause you agreed to?

There's nothing in this that I see going anywhere. In the end i see this costing Melnyk more money because Heatley's agent will probably make him pay for all the legal fees for wasting everyone's time.
You skipped the part where he demanded the trade. I think the NTC is there in spirit to protect a player from being blindsided. I don't think it was intended to give a player control over an organization. I don't have any personal interest whatsoever in either team, but I do think it's unfair that the Senators basically lose in every way: cash, and value for a player. If a player wants out he should have to eat some of the damage as well, like by waiving his NTC.

Jedrik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:40 PM
  #19
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,044
vCash: 500
Cirris
Taking up someones time is not really grounds for sueing.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:49 PM
  #20
frag2
Registered User
 
frag2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by finchster View Post
I think if you ask to be traded that should waive your no movement clause and a team can send you anywhere.

If you get a no movement clause in your contract that should protect you from the team moving you against your will, not against deciding where you get moved to
I agree. But won't happen till next CBA at earliest.

frag2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 01:56 PM
  #21
CBJenga
Registered User
 
CBJenga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bugg View Post
Yes, everything is a giant conspiracy meant to hurt the Sharks... never mind that it's pretty clear Heatley gamed the NTC system to ensure he wound up in San Jose.
Here I was thinking it was pretty clear that Heatley gamed the NTC system to ensure he'd end up somewhere he wanted. Which as I have said before is a very non-subtle thing about the NTC, it means very clearly that the player has this right.

And do you really believe that players are just banging down the doors to play in San Jose? If you read the main boards, about people invoking NTC's, you'll see a good number of players who invoked their NTC NOT to go to SJ.

I don't really think it's about Ottowa trying to mess with San Jose, as it is a spurned owner who had a dramatic summer, trying to get back at the player that was at the center of that situation. I think it'd be the same thing if Heatley had gone anywhere else.

Mod: deleted.


Last edited by Fugu: 11-03-2009 at 10:49 PM. Reason: qep
CBJenga is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 02:04 PM
  #22
swiftwin
#lalala
 
swiftwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJenga View Post


So why are the Sens the ones making this drama then....
Its 4 million bucks. He wants his money back, and he will most likely get it.

swiftwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 02:15 PM
  #23
Dark4ng3l
Registered User
 
Dark4ng3l's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,054
vCash: 500
The problem here is that Heatley refusing the trade cost the Sens 4 million that they should not have had to pay him. To me it's obvious that the Sens should not be on the hook for that after he asks for a trade then is traded but refuses the trade thus making the sens pay him his 4 million.

Dark4ng3l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 02:17 PM
  #24
CBJenga
Registered User
 
CBJenga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by swiftwin View Post
Its 4 million bucks. He wants his money back, and he will most likely get it.
So causing drama is cool when the sens do it, but not heatley.

Awesome.


Slash: I really am still very unconvinced that he will succeed in this suit. In very simple terms, Heatley had a NMC, Heatley invoked said NMC and nixed Edmonton.
There's been a discussion on what the NMC SHOULD mean, but the reason that is happening is because it doesn't currently have that meaning.

Heatley said they could talk to Edmonton, but did he say that he would waive the NMC to go there? Or was his intent to let the Sens gauge how much they could get for him in this drama? I don't know. But I think as long as you have a NMC/NTC, there is no "should" about agreeing to a deal. And that's where the real issue is.

It could be that Heatley had added edmonton to the list because he wanted to play with certain players, but they were to be in the package that was sent to the Sens. In that case, the reason that Edmonton was on the list is destroyed, and it's well within Heatley's right to nix that trade.

CBJenga is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2009, 02:27 PM
  #25
frag2
Registered User
 
frag2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJenga View Post
So causing drama is cool when the sens do it, but not heatley.

Awesome.


Slash: I really am still very unconvinced that he will succeed in this suit. In very simple terms, Heatley had a NMC, Heatley invoked said NMC and nixed Edmonton.
There's been a discussion on what the NMC SHOULD mean, but the reason that is happening is because it doesn't currently have that meaning.

Heatley said they could talk to Edmonton, but did he say that he would waive the NMC to go there? Or was his intent to let the Sens gauge how much they could get for him in this drama? I don't know. But I think as long as you have a NMC/NTC, there is no "should" about agreeing to a deal. And that's where the real issue is.

It could be that Heatley had added edmonton to the list because he wanted to play with certain players, but they were to be in the package that was sent to the Sens. In that case, the reason that Edmonton was on the list is destroyed, and it's well within Heatley's right to nix that trade.
Thanks for grasping at straws on the last part. hahah.
Heatley was toying with everyone. He knew what team he wanted and abused the "power" that came with a NMC. Was he "entitled" to, yes perhaps. But was it a classless move-absolutely.

The only reason you back him up on his charade is because he plays for your team. Imagine if Jumbo Joe did that....

frag2 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 05:12 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.