HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

Sabres elect to take Pat Kaleta to salary arbitration

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-06-2010, 10:09 PM
  #1
wildcat48
HFB Partner
 
wildcat48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Portland, ME
Country: United States
Posts: 3,254
vCash: 500
Sabres elect to take Pat Kaleta to salary arbitration

As the title says....

Link>>>>

wildcat48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 10:17 PM
  #2
Burgmania
PA Guy Of The Future
 
Burgmania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Orleans County
Country: United States
Posts: 4,296
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Burgmania Send a message via MSN to Burgmania
Seriously? Wow.

Burgmania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 10:19 PM
  #3
BuiltTagonTough
Stand still laddy!
 
BuiltTagonTough's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 10,492
vCash: 500
Ok? Not sure I get this one.

BuiltTagonTough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 10:32 PM
  #4
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,320
vCash: 500
thats a ******* thing to do to a local who gives his body/career to the team...

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 10:36 PM
  #5
Gerbe42
Hodgson 2 Vanek
 
Gerbe42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,347
vCash: 586
what

Gerbe42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 10:36 PM
  #6
aceface33
Registered User
 
aceface33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Herkimer, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,003
vCash: 500
Eh? Are they afraid he won't sign?

aceface33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 11:01 PM
  #7
ZemgusWho
Play for 2013+
 
ZemgusWho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
maybe this means there was something to that crazy rumor earlier in the season that Kaleta was looking to Europe?

I'm not sure I understand the logic of this.

ZemgusWho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 11:25 PM
  #8
BloFan4Life
Registered User
 
BloFan4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lancaster, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,938
vCash: 500
Darcy can't even sign RFA?!?! Wow, this is turning into a huge joke. When the hell is he going to get fired??

BloFan4Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 11:27 PM
  #9
buffalowing88
Registered User
 
buffalowing88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
What the hell?? The one guy on the roster who I thought would never have a contract issue. ********.

buffalowing88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 11:31 PM
  #10
sabresfan65
Vote for Teppo!
 
sabresfan65's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Vegas
Country: United States
Posts: 1,080
vCash: 500
I'm wondering if they heard someone was sniffing around with an offer sheet and didn't want to have to deal with that so they elected to take him to arbitration so that the offer sheet isn't something they have to worry about.

sabresfan65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 11:31 PM
  #11
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,437
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
But the threat of taking a player to arbitration might also be the impetus the team and player need to come to a contract. Had the St. Louis Blues and Jaroslav Halak not come to a four-year deal worth $15 million Tuesday afternoon, the Blues would have had the option to take Halak to arbitration to force a contract.
Much like Kennedy, I doubt they ever make the arbitration date.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 11:40 PM
  #12
Shmuffalo
It's SAMSON, bozo.
 
Shmuffalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, eh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,929
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabresfan65 View Post
I'm wondering if they heard someone was sniffing around with an offer sheet and didn't want to have to deal with that so they elected to take him to arbitration so that the offer sheet isn't something they have to worry about.
could be. i don't think we are in danger of losing kaleta. the backlash the team would get for losing this guy would be tremendous, and darcy knows it.

Shmuffalo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2010, 11:41 PM
  #13
missingmika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Its interesting that its club elected. This means Kaleta can never have club elected arbitration again in his career. The Sabres can also only use 1 more club election this year. Also of note, unlike the JP Dumont situation, the Sabres cannot walk away from the arbitrators award due to it being club elected.

While its from Hockey Buzz, this one writer has a copy of Dmitri Khristich's arbitration ruling from 1998. Its an interesting read.: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=16113

missingmika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 12:08 AM
  #14
ZemgusWho
Play for 2013+
 
ZemgusWho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabresfan65 View Post
I'm wondering if they heard someone was sniffing around with an offer sheet and didn't want to have to deal with that so they elected to take him to arbitration so that the offer sheet isn't something they have to worry about.
Can someone help me out here. So arbitration means that an RFA is no longer an RFA? or he's protected somehow? I didn't know that this was a tactic that could be used in this way. (and if it is, why wouldn't teams use it more often?)

I do agree with the other posters, unlikely it gets to arbitration I think.

ZemgusWho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 12:34 AM
  #15
missingmika
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronin View Post
Can someone help me out here. So arbitration means that an RFA is no longer an RFA? or he's protected somehow? I didn't know that this was a tactic that could be used in this way. (and if it is, why wouldn't teams use it more often?)

I do agree with the other posters, unlikely it gets to arbitration I think.
Article 10.2(a)(i)(B) states if a player or club elect salary arbitration, then the player cannot negotiate with other teams besides his prior club. He can sign his offer sheet, or negotiate with other clubs if the team walks away from the arbitrator's decision. However, since this is club elected arbitration, the Sabres cannot walk away.

missingmika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 01:16 AM
  #16
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,927
vCash: 500
This better not be motivated by the Sabres trying to save money and keep Kaleta's salary from increasing dramatically - after the 200% +/- raise Regier handed out to a less important player like Leopold who has yet to earn his keep in Buffalo, giving Kaleta a raise over his previous salary seems only fair.

Sabretip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 01:17 AM
  #17
Dreakon
Registered User
 
Dreakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mighty Taco
Country: United States
Posts: 857
vCash: 500
So in other words, the arbitrator (a third party) decides the contract for Kaleta based on his performance, arguments from the Sabres and Kaleta's party and what they feel is fair? And in this case, with the club electing arbitration, they have to take it no matter what? Does the player have to accept what the arbitrating party decides?

The gist I'm getting from this, basically with the club electing arbitration, Kaleta is definately on the team next season? Just maybe for more or less then he would've otherwise?

Dreakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 01:42 AM
  #18
cybresabre
Sir Hellcat
 
cybreSabre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: wNY
Posts: 7,193
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to cybresabre
Quote:
Originally Posted by missingmika View Post
While its from Hockey Buzz, this one writer has a copy of Dmitri Khristich's arbitration ruling from 1998. Its an interesting read.: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=16113
I had never read that, absolutely fascinating stuff. Thanks!

cybresabre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 02:11 AM
  #19
Moskau
Registered User
 
Moskau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Western New York
Posts: 9,791
vCash: 100
I can't see Buffalo wanting to take Kaleta to arbitration for monetary reasons, unless Kaleta's demands are absurd. The reason being that unless his demands are absurd I just don't see Buffalo winning the hearing. Kaleta led the team in a number of statistics including short handed goals in limited ice-time in his first year of PK duty. Things like that go a long way in cases.

Moskau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 04:59 AM
  #20
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,780
vCash: 500
Was it a messed up thing for TK to elect to go to arbitration?

I don't see the issue with Regier choosing to take Kaleta.

To me, it signals that the Sabres really want to keep Kaleta and make sure he is under contract by the time camp starts.....

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 07:26 AM
  #21
Armond White
Go Sabres!
 
Armond White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oakland Zoo
Country: United States
Posts: 10,293
vCash: 500
Dooooooooooooom

Armond White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 07:31 AM
  #22
Duddy
Everyday is
 
Duddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Austria
Posts: 10,380
vCash: 500
Curse you darcy

Duddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 07:45 AM
  #23
joechip
Registered User
 
joechip's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gainesville, Fl
Posts: 3,228
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to joechip
Both sides have the right to do this. By doing this for Kaleta they short-circuit the OS and guarantee him under contract (thanks to those above that said this previously) for this year.

This is a very good thing, from those perspectives.

Ta,

joechip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 08:20 AM
  #24
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,075
vCash: 50
I have no problem with this. Teams do this when the two sides are far apart in their contract proposals and protracted negotiations seem likely. Buffalo cuts that off at the pass by doing this (read: proactive move). The Sabres clearly believe Kaleta's fair market value, as would be determined by an arbitrator, is below his current asking price.

The important point in all this, though, has already been touched on: it guarantees that Kaleta will be under contract by training camp.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2010, 08:20 AM
  #25
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Bob View Post
Was it a messed up thing for TK to elect to go to arbitration?

I don't see the issue with Regier choosing to take Kaleta.

To me, it signals that the Sabres really want to keep Kaleta and make sure he is under contract by the time camp starts.....
Like you pointed out. This means they want him here and under contract before camp.

How that leads to posters mother****ing Regier is beyond me.

joshjull 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 03:45 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.