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, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-04-2009, 12:10 AM
  #76
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffaloed View Post
Does the arbitrator have any discretion to penalize parties who file frivolous grievances? The NHLPA ought to be able to recover legal expenses. This is just plain harassment by a sore loser who couldn't win by playing by the rules.
I cannot see in the CBA where an Arbitrator has such powers - but it is a great suggestion. The CBA does allow for an awarding of costs. Here is the section that applies:
Quote:
17.15 Fees and Costs. Except as otherwise set forth herein, all costs of arbitration, including the fees and expenses of the Impartial Arbitrator, the independent physician and the joint transcript costs, if any, will be borne equally between the parties, except that each party shall bear its own costs of transportation, counsel, witnesses and the like.
The decision of the Arbitrator must be strictly in accordance with the CBA and SPC. It is not about what the Arbitrator may see as fair - the issue will be strictly construed. As noted at 17.3 of the CBA inter alia:
Quote:
...(T)he Impartial Arbitrator will not have the jurisdiction or authority to add to, subtract from, or alter in any way the provisions of this Agreement, including any SPC. In resolving Grievances, the Impartial Arbitrator has the authority to interpret, apply and determine compliance with any provision of this Agreement, including any SPC. Otherwise, the Impartial Arbitrator shall have no authority to alter or modify the contractual relationship or status between a Player and a Club, other than where such remedy is expressly provided for in this Agreement.
Based on the limited powers of the Arbitrator, I do not see how Melnyk hopes to succeed.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 01:15 AM
  #77
SoulPatch
Registered User
 
SoulPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,906
vCash: 500
Just so everyone's clear, Melnyk filed this grievance in the summer, not yesterday. And while I don't think Melnyk will win this (my earlier post was in response to a misrepresented generalization), I'll quote a post on the Sens board as to why I believe he's doing this. Other than the fact that he's thrown away $4 million dollars:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haymaker View Post
I agree, and will be thoroughly surprised if he gets a dime back. I really think that this is a gesture by Melnyk to bring attention to the league and his fellow owners that the way NTCs/NMCs work has to change with the next CBA. What he's doing is a great way to call attention to this problem.
And yes I do believe there is a problem with what Heatley did. If any other player on another team did this I would feel the same way. IMO the NTC/NMC should protect a player from a team abusing his right to play in the city he signed with by trading him when he doesn't want to go. I don't think the player should be allowed to dictate where/when he wants to play unless he's a free agent. I don't think a player should be allowed to just leave his contract when he feels like it and to go to a "winning" team. Different strokes I guess.

SoulPatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 03:41 AM
  #78
Blades of Glory
Troll Captain
 
Blades of Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 18,369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulPatch View Post
Just so everyone's clear, Melnyk filed this grievance in the summer, not yesterday. And while I don't think Melnyk will win this (my earlier post was in response to a misrepresented generalization), I'll quote a post on the Sens board as to why I believe he's doing this. Other than the fact that he's thrown away $4 million dollars:



And yes I do believe there is a problem with what Heatley did. If any other player on another team did this I would feel the same way. IMO the NTC/NMC should protect a player from a team abusing his right to play in the city he signed with by trading him when he doesn't want to go. I don't think the player should be allowed to dictate where/when he wants to play unless he's a free agent. I don't think a player should be allowed to just leave his contract when he feels like it and to go to a "winning" team. Different strokes I guess.
I don't really think Heatley "dictated" where he wanted to play. He didn't want to play in Edmonton, which is completely within his rights considering he had the NTC. Did he push for San Jose? We don't really know. It's the perfect example of a "he said-she said" situation, and those usually don't go anywhere in court. Did Heatley want to play in San Jose? Yes, but he didn't force a trade to San Jose. He merely rejected a trade to Edmonton.

Blades of Glory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 05:16 AM
  #79
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,043
vCash: 500
Buffaloed
What are your talking about ottawa played by the rules.As for harrasment please show how in anyway this is harrasment.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 05:35 AM
  #80
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
I don't really think Heatley "dictated" where he wanted to play. He didn't want to play in Edmonton, which is completely within his rights considering he had the NTC. Did he push for San Jose? We don't really know. It's the perfect example of a "he said-she said" situation, and those usually don't go anywhere in court. Did Heatley want to play in San Jose? Yes, but he didn't force a trade to San Jose. He merely rejected a trade to Edmonton.
Sure he did. Ottawa was not free to make a trade but in each instance had to check back with Heatley's side. The only reason he's not on a team he would have handpicked is the cap. I think at that point Ottawa was just happy to get anything of value back.

That said, I doubt Melnyck has much of a case.

  Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 06:03 AM
  #81
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,043
vCash: 500
Blades of Glory
Yes he did he gave ottawa of teams he would be willing to go to.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 06:54 AM
  #82
ocarina
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjhl2009fan View Post
Blades of Glory
Yes he did he gave ottawa of teams he would be willing to go to.
if the reported lists of teams was true, then it was a very unrealistic list (mainly contenders with a lack of cap space to accommodate his contract).

And I fully agree that this issue of players abusing their NMC's should be addressed. IMO, the point/spirit of it is to ensure that a player has security in knowing he can't get traded without his consent, not as a way of systematically dictating where he can go if he suddenly decides to renege on his end of the bargain.

ocarina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 07:00 AM
  #83
SoulPatch
Registered User
 
SoulPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
I don't really think Heatley "dictated" where he wanted to play. He didn't want to play in Edmonton, which is completely within his rights considering he had the NTC. Did he push for San Jose? We don't really know. It's the perfect example of a "he said-she said" situation, and those usually don't go anywhere in court. Did Heatley want to play in San Jose? Yes, but he didn't force a trade to San Jose. He merely rejected a trade to Edmonton.
He demanded a trade and gave us a list of teams that he would accept being traded to. On this list included:

Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit, NYR, San Jose. You know, all the contenders. The best part was that most of these teams couldn't afford Heatley on their cap, severely limiting our options. For some reason he gave us the opportunity to speak to Edmonton and then nixed the deal at the last minute. I believe he expected a bidding war amongst his listed teams and that just didn't happen. The SJ offer was probably a dream come true.

SoulPatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 07:38 AM
  #84
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,699
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfredsson11 View Post
Bill Daly indicated in the summer that Melynk has a good case.
Melynk will need something more then what we, or I, at least know.

Like a obvious example would have been if Heatly had said "put a deal together and I'll waive my N T/M C and go anywhere" or something like that -- and then changed his mind.

You need some kind of culpa on Heatlys behave. Its definitely not impossible that they could dig up, and prove, something like that. But it won't be easy.

It won't be enough to say that if Heatly had waived his NTC we could have saved 3m. What did it really mean that he said that they could talk to EDM?


Last edited by Ola: 11-04-2009 at 07:50 AM.
Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 08:17 AM
  #85
Alfredsson11
Registered User
 
Alfredsson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,940
vCash: 500
http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hock.../11625761.html

Quote:
According to an NHL source, that decision by the arbitrator in the summer could be a blow to Melnyk’s case. The Senators insist they had been given permission to speak with 8-10 teams — including the Oilers — when Murray made the trade before the bonus was payable.

If Melnyk can prove that Heatley told Murray to talk to Edmonton then I think they could have a case.

Alfredsson11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 08:26 AM
  #86
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,347
vCash: 500
wow, looks like Melnyk has all but locked up that "whiner of the year" award.

He makes the average hockey fan look like Maria Theresa.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 08:30 AM
  #87
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
wow, looks like Melnyk has all but locked up that "whiner of the year" award.

He makes the average hockey fan look like Maria Theresa.
So what he should do nothing not say a word and let it all go.As for locking up whiner of the year lots of time to go and time will tell.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 08:38 AM
  #88
Alfredsson11
Registered User
 
Alfredsson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
wow, looks like Melnyk has all but locked up that "whiner of the year" award.

He makes the average hockey fan look like Maria Theresa.
How is he whining?

If someone told you that you had a chance to get your 4 million back, you wouldn't try?

Daly indicated in the summer that he could have a case.

He filed this back in July, right after he paid the money.

Alfredsson11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 09:38 AM
  #89
SpezDispenser
Registered User
 
SpezDispenser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 15,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
wow, looks like Melnyk has all but locked up that "whiner of the year" award.

He makes the average hockey fan look like Maria Theresa.
Wow, really? I would have done the same and more - even though he doesn't have a chance in heck of winning this. Whiner? Sure. He paid this guy 8 million dollars last year for the right for him to nix a trade and then cost another 4 million in 'bonuses'. A businessman like Eugene Melnyk doesn't get to where he is by whining.

Where Melnyk needs to focus on is the lost season ticket sales because no one in Ottawa wanted to see Heatley on this team - and they weren't willing to pay for season tickets while he was still here. If he can prove that (which is impossible with the economy), then he might be able to get 4 million dollars back, but it won't be by the bonus being rescinded from Heatley's camp.

Whiner.

SpezDispenser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 09:46 AM
  #90
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpezDispenser View Post
Wow, really? I would have done the same and more - even though he doesn't have a chance in heck of winning this. Whiner? Sure. He paid this guy 8 million dollars last year for the right for him to nix a trade and then cost another 4 million in 'bonuses'. A businessman like Eugene Melnyk doesn't get to where he is by whining.

Where Melnyk needs to focus on is the lost season ticket sales because no one in Ottawa wanted to see Heatley on this team - and they weren't willing to pay for season tickets while he was still here. If he can prove that (which is impossible with the economy), then he might be able to get 4 million dollars back, but it won't be by the bonus being rescinded from Heatley's camp.

Whiner.
I'm pretty sure there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye. I believe there is much more information on both sides. From what little
I know, this situation is somewhat confusing.

I also believe that unless a contract has specific language that defines the team's reasonable options if a trade is requested/demanded, then the demand for a trade should void any no trade clause.

As an example, I believe Tomas Kaberle's contract requires him to name ten acceptable teams if he requests a trade, and the Leafs are free to deal with those ten teams. That's reasonable. If a clause like that doesn't exist, I believe a demand should void the NTC.

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 10:22 AM
  #91
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,321
vCash: 500
Good deal for the Sharks ownership I reckon. They get Heatley at a full cap hit, but only have to pay half his salary. Like Jagr in NYR? So in a sense, I guess the trade was Heatley and $4 mil in actual salary savings for the first year to SJ for Michalek and Cheechoo ?

I imagine they could have even negotiated around this point in the trade. Perhaps Doug Wilson says, I’ll add a 3rd. And Murray says, well we are giving your owners $4mil dollars in a sense, so how about trading that money saved for a better pick.

It’s ok to trade money isn’t it?


I wonder if there are other small market teams that could take advantage of this in the future. For example, lets say the Sens signed a ufa for 2 yrs at $10 mil, but structured the deal to give him $5 mil in year 1, a $4mil signing bonus at the end of year 1, and then trade him for a real good draft pick during training camp year 2 as he will only be owed $1 mil in year 2. A struggling team may be willing under those circumstances to offer up a better draft pick that otherwise might not have been available for such a high priced player. This could allow big markets a way to use their money advantage again to make trades.

Im sure i remember discussing this story earlier in the summer when it first happened though. And the common reaction was well that is undertandable, maybe he has a case, meh, but now when the article is reprinted again with no new news, he is a whiner. Pretty easy to manipulate hockey fans opinions eh.

Who knows, the outcome of lodging a grievance might create a good precedent or decision that everyone is glad they went through it for.

Its not like Melnyk is filing a civil suit suit for tortious intereference or something. That would be when the fun would happen. This would just be a grievance on technicalities.

thinkwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 10:52 AM
  #92
Blades of Glory
Troll Captain
 
Blades of Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 18,369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulPatch View Post
He demanded a trade and gave us a list of teams that he would accept being traded to. On this list included:

Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit, NYR, San Jose. You know, all the contenders. The best part was that most of these teams couldn't afford Heatley on their cap, severely limiting our options. For some reason he gave us the opportunity to speak to Edmonton and then nixed the deal at the last minute. I believe he expected a bidding war amongst his listed teams and that just didn't happen. The SJ offer was probably a dream come true.
But that is what having a NTC gives a player the right to do; give his team a list of teams he'd accept a trade to. There's nothing contractually or legally wrong about what he did. I completely understand why Ottawa fans/management dislike him, but he never did anything that could ever be used in court.

So what if he let you talk to Edmonton then nixed the deal? Is that wrong? He didn't want to play in Edmonton; that's what it came down to. Maybe he thought he did, but he decided he wanted to play in a less hockey-crazy environment, not to mention on a better hockey team.

SJ didn't have the cap room for Heatley before they traded Ehrhoff/Lukowich/Michalek/Cheechoo. So the "he only wanted to be traded to teams who didn't have salary space for him" argument is rather pointless. Quite simply, San Jose had the ability to clear cap room for him without losing a substantial amount of talent, and they did.

It's hard for me to take anything seriously when it comes out of Ottawa and it regards Dany Heatley. About how he's a horrible teammate, he's selfish, how he supposedly forced a deal to San Jose. Doug Wilson talked to Steve Yzerman, who selected Heatley for Team Canada, and Yzerman gave him a thumbs up. Todd McLellan coached Heatley in the World Juniors, and he supported the deal. Sharks assistant GM Wayne Thomas has known Heatley since he was a kid, and he signed off on it. I completely understand the dislike for Heatley coming from Ottawa fans, but on a management and player level, it's simply a case of an ex-GF trying to ruin her ex-BF's new relationship. I'll take Steve Yzerman's word, he has no emotional investment in the situation. The fact that he felt strongly enough about Heatley to support arguably his team's biggest Western title competitor trading for him speaks volumes.

Blades of Glory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 10:57 AM
  #93
Comely
Registered User
 
Comely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,761
vCash: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
But that is what having a NTC gives a player the right to do; give his team a list of teams he'd accept a trade to. There's nothing contractually or legally wrong about what he did. I completely understand why Ottawa fans/management dislike him, but he never did anything that could ever be used in court.

So what if he let you talk to Edmonton then nixed the deal? Is that wrong? He didn't want to play in Edmonton; that's what it came down to. Maybe he thought he did, but he decided he wanted to play in a less hockey-crazy environment, not to mention on a better hockey team.

SJ didn't have the cap room for Heatley before they traded Ehrhoff/Lukowich/Michalek/Cheechoo. So the "he only wanted to be traded to teams who didn't have salary space for him" argument is rather pointless. Quite simply, San Jose had the ability to clear cap room for him without losing a substantial amount of talent, and they did.

It's hard for me to take anything seriously when it comes out of Ottawa and it regards Dany Heatley. About how he's a horrible teammate, he's selfish, how he supposedly forced a deal to San Jose. Doug Wilson talked to Steve Yzerman, who selected Heatley for Team Canada, and Yzerman gave him a thumbs up. Todd McLellan coached Heatley in the World Juniors, and he supported the deal. Sharks assistant GM Wayne Thomas has known Heatley since he was a kid, and he signed off on it. I completely understand the dislike for Heatley coming from Ottawa fans, but on a management and player level, it's simply a case of an ex-GF trying to ruin her ex-BF's new relationship. I'll take Steve Yzerman's word, he has no emotional investment in the situation. The fact that he felt strongly enough about Heatley to support arguably his team's biggest Western title competitor trading for him speaks volumes.
Most of Ottawa knows he wasnt a locker room cancer that was being spread by other fans whenever an Ottawa fan would ask for something reasonable in a trade.

Comely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 11:01 AM
  #94
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
But that is what having a NTC gives a player the right to do; give his team a list of teams he'd accept a trade to. There's nothing contractually or legally wrong about what he did. I completely understand why Ottawa fans/management dislike him, but he never did anything that could ever be used in court.

So what if he let you talk to Edmonton then nixed the deal? Is that wrong? He didn't want to play in Edmonton; that's what it came down to. Maybe he thought he did, but he decided he wanted to play in a less hockey-crazy environment, not to mention on a better hockey team.

SJ didn't have the cap room for Heatley before they traded Ehrhoff/Lukowich/Michalek/Cheechoo. So the "he only wanted to be traded to teams who didn't have salary space for him" argument is rather pointless. Quite simply, San Jose had the ability to clear cap room for him without losing a substantial amount of talent, and they did.

It's hard for me to take anything seriously when it comes out of Ottawa and it regards Dany Heatley. About how he's a horrible teammate, he's selfish, how he supposedly forced a deal to San Jose. Doug Wilson talked to Steve Yzerman, who selected Heatley for Team Canada, and Yzerman gave him a thumbs up. Todd McLellan coached Heatley in the World Juniors, and he supported the deal. Sharks assistant GM Wayne Thomas has known Heatley since he was a kid, and he signed off on it. I completely understand the dislike for Heatley coming from Ottawa fans, but on a management and player level, it's simply a case of an ex-GF trying to ruin her ex-BF's new relationship. I'll take Steve Yzerman's word, he has no emotional investment in the situation. The fact that he felt strongly enough about Heatley to support arguably his team's biggest Western title competitor trading for him speaks volumes.
Firstly, this is almost utterly beside the point.

And furthermore, it's not just Ottawa fans that see something wrong, if not technically or contractually, but perhaps with the intent of the NMC's/NTC's.

Heatley's skills as a player are not at all in question. Look at the amount of money and term Ottawa committed to keeping him with the team.


The intent of the NMC/NTC is to protect a player who indeed has committed to a team over a longer term from being dumped if/when management feels like doing so.

The intention of these clauses is not to give a player a right to demand a trade and then pick and sort through the rest of the league, with the sole basis being his personal preferences. Trades are usually done to improve a team, and traditionally have been hockey decisions. Lately, some have been about cap issues. In the majority of cases, it's the team that decides if/when a trade is necessary.

Ottawa signed the contract and negotiated the deal, but I doubt you'll find anyone who can say that the NMC/NTC was used as intended (or the common understanding of these clauses). Technically, yes, I doubt the Sens have a case, but that doesn't mean it was right.

  Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 11:09 AM
  #95
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 59,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild View Post
Good deal for the Sharks ownership I reckon. They get Heatley at a full cap hit, but only have to pay half his salary. Like Jagr in NYR? So in a sense, I guess the trade was Heatley and $4 mil in actual salary savings for the first year to SJ for Michalek and Cheechoo ?
IIRC, the Sharks are actually paying out $3-5m more in actual salary (over the life of the three contracts involved).

(Lukowich and Ehrhoff trade was to get cap space to resign the final two RFAs - Mitchell and Staubitz. Ferriero was also signed immediately after trade.)

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 11:10 AM
  #96
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulPatch View Post
He demanded a trade and gave us a list of teams that he would accept being traded to. On this list included:

Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit, NYR, San Jose
. You know, all the contenders. The best part was that most of these teams couldn't afford Heatley on their cap, severely limiting our options. For some reason he gave us the opportunity to speak to Edmonton and then nixed the deal at the last minute. I believe he expected a bidding war amongst his listed teams and that just didn't happen. The SJ offer was probably a dream come true.

Do you have a link from a credible source that his list was confined to only: Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit, NYR, San Jose?

I haven't followed this closely enough, so I haven't seen any lists. I just recall a pending deal with the Oilers, then later the Sharks deal.

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 11:15 AM
  #97
Blades of Glory
Troll Captain
 
Blades of Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 18,369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Firstly, this is almost utterly beside the point.

And furthermore, it's not just Ottawa fans that see something wrong, if not technically or contractually, but perhaps with the intent of the NMC's/NTC's.

Heatley's skills as a player are not at all in question. Look at the amount of money and term Ottawa committed to keeping him with the team.


The intent of the NMC/NTC is to protect a player who indeed has committed to a team over a longer term from being dumped if/when management feels like doing so.

The intention of these clauses is not to give a player a right to demand a trade and then pick and sort through the rest of the league, with the sole basis being his personal preferences. Trades are usually done to improve a team, and traditionally have been hockey decisions. Lately, some have been about cap issues. In the majority of cases, it's the team that decides if/when a trade is necessary.

Ottawa signed the contract and negotiated the deal, but I doubt you'll find anyone who can say that the NMC/NTC was used as intended (or the common understanding of these clauses). Technically, yes, I doubt the Sens have a case, but that doesn't mean it was right.
I personally dislike NMC's/NTC's, so I won't argue with you about them. I think the concept of a no-trade clause is absolutely stupid, and the teams that hand them out leave open the possibility of being screwed over. There should be a limit on NTC's, maybe something based on experience. I wouldn't have a problem with 10 years vets being able to have a NTC inserted into their contract, but giving relatively young players that type of power is asking for trouble.

For example, Doug Wilson isn't very generous with NTC's. He gave one to Patrick Marleau, an 11 year veteran of the team and the then-captain, which I have no problems with. Marleau has been a Shark since day one, and has shown his loyalty to this organization more than enough times to deserve one. Joe Thornton has one as well, and again, I don't have a problem with this. He has loved San Jose since his first day in Teal and will spend the rest of his career here barring something drastic happening. Not to mention, he has done nothing to make one think he would demand a trade or want out because of personal problems. Nabokov is in Marleau's category, a long-time Shark who has proven his loyalty. Even then, it's conditional; if the Sharks miss the playoffs he can be traded anywhere. Bryan Murray, on the other hand, gives them out like candy on Halloween. Alfredsson and Phillips are understandable, because of their long history with the franchise. But Fisher, Heatley, and Spezza? A little much, in my opinion.

We are essentially getting into what is "wrong" or "right" about NTC's/NMC's. Yeah, they aren't technically supposed to be used the way Heatley used. They're "supposed" to protect the player from being traded from somewhere he didn't want to go, however, and that's how he used it. He didn't want to play in Edmonton.

Hockey fans tend to make too big a deal of a player asking for a trade. Especially this whole "list of teams" thing. This happens all the time in other sports, especially football and baseball. And almost every player with a clause has a list of teams that he would go to, and considering that, would reject a trade to "other" teams.

I strongly dislike NTC/NMC. I would love for the NHL to do away with them completely, or on a more realistic note, at least, as I said earlier, put limits on who can receive them. But the NHLPA would never let that happen. Ottawa ****ed up by giving Heatley a NMC. If Bryan Murray was smart he would have put some type of limit on the clause, like limiting the number of teams Heatley can reject, or having a list of 10 or so teams he would accept a trade to. It's pretty common around the league. But he didn't, and that's why it looks bad when Heatley seemingly "forces" a trade to a certain destination.


Last edited by Blades of Glory: 11-04-2009 at 11:21 AM.
Blades of Glory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 11:33 AM
  #98
SoulPatch
Registered User
 
SoulPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
But that is what having a NTC gives a player the right to do; give his team a list of teams he'd accept a trade to. There's nothing contractually or legally wrong about what he did. I completely understand why Ottawa fans/management dislike him, but he never did anything that could ever be used in court.

So what if he let you talk to Edmonton then nixed the deal? Is that wrong? He didn't want to play in Edmonton; that's what it came down to. Maybe he thought he did, but he decided he wanted to play in a less hockey-crazy environment, not to mention on a better hockey team.

SJ didn't have the cap room for Heatley before they traded Ehrhoff/Lukowich/Michalek/Cheechoo. So the "he only wanted to be traded to teams who didn't have salary space for him" argument is rather pointless. Quite simply, San Jose had the ability to clear cap room for him without losing a substantial amount of talent, and they did.
Fugu touched on your last paragraph, so I didn't quote it because that has no relevance here. As for the rest of your post I explained my opinion earlier.

"And yes I do believe there is a problem with what Heatley did. If any other player on another team did this I would feel the same way. IMO the NTC/NMC should protect a player from a team abusing his right to play in the city he signed with by trading him when he doesn't want to go. I don't think the player should be allowed to dictate where/when he wants to play unless he's a free agent. I don't think a player should be allowed to just leave his contract when he feels like it and to go to a "winning" team. Different strokes I guess."

And for the record the "he only wanted to be traded to teams who didn't have salary space for him" is not pointless. It handicapped our club to a list of teams with only few viable options. This is not the basis of my argument though. I explained above what I think about this situation. I only brought up this point because you claimed:
Quote:
I don't really think Heatley "dictated" where he wanted to play.
---

Quote:
Originally Posted by leek View Post
Do you have a link from a credible source that his list was confined to only: Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit, NYR, San Jose?

I haven't followed this closely enough, so I haven't seen any lists. I just recall a pending deal with the Oilers, then later the Sharks deal.
There were more than just those 5 teams, the list was somewhere from 6-8 but I don't remember all the teams. From what I DO remember reading, the list contained contenders (as posted) and teams on the rise. My "credible source" is the Ottawa Sun as well as other local media outlets that covered this story religiously in the summer. Many links were posted on the Ottawa boards throughout this saga but I really couldn't be bothered to search through 10 threads (10,000 posts oh god) to find the exact quote.

SoulPatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 11:52 AM
  #99
Caeldan
Moderator
Whippet Whisperer
 
Caeldan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,246
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfredsson11 View Post
Well we all know that they did it.
Actually... as far as leaks go - I believe that the last comment I ever read was that it may have been another GM (and implied that it may have been one just down the road from us...) who leaked it following some minor negotiations.

Because I know both sides have denied being the source of the leak, and I believe someone in the Ottawa brass back in the summer actually saying that they didn't think it was the Heatley camp either.

Caeldan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2009, 11:55 AM
  #100
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
IIRC, the Sharks are actually paying out $3-5m more in actual salary (over the life of the three contracts involved).

(Lukowich and Ehrhoff trade was to get cap space to resign the final two RFAs - Mitchell and Staubitz. Ferriero was also signed immediately after trade.)

This is important to keep in mind if anyone starts suggesting the Sharks should pay the bonus. Any value of a trade takes into account, thanks to caps and budgets, the amount not only of the cap number for a player, but his actual salary. As we've discussed here on the BOHB, front-loading offers advantages to a player and perhaps gives teams willing to structure deals in this manner an advantage over cash-strapped teams. (Or teams where owners are more concerned with cash flow.)

The Sharks gave up assets based on what they were willing to pay that remained on Heatley's contract. Had someone told them they'd have to pay the extra $4MM, the deal might have looked different, and/or not happened at all. (Also, many teams knew the structure of Heatley's deal and certainly found it in their best interest to wait until 1 July passed. Ottawa may have asked another team to pay that, but would they have found any takers?)

  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 04:43 PM.

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.