HFBoards

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

NHLPA is investigating the Nashville Predators

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-30-2011, 04:40 PM
  #151
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 15,295
vCash: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by darth5 View Post
This makes me wonder who is pushing this grievance strategy. If you look at the list of QO players involved, the only one I see that stands to gain a substantial bounty is SK47.

Think about it. Perhaps he and his agent were not at all satisfied with how negotiations are going with DP and he is still an RFA. How can he create leverage? Exploit this unclear language in the CBA by getting the NHLPA to throw a monkey wrench in. Three cases emerge:

1) Worst case: he gets the best contract he can negotiate if gambit fails.
2) a panic contract from Nashville at an inflated value to salvage their asset rights and keep him
3) Arbitrator rules in favor of NHLPA and he gets to hit the free market payday.

If I had to guess who pushed for this using the PA as fig-leaf cover, I say it is SK47.
I thought this first as well but with strickland saying more than one team was being looked at I suspect it was really driven by the PA all along and they were just lying in wait for something to try to bring up.

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 04:41 PM
  #152
darth5
Rowsdower!
 
darth5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
I thought this first as well but with strickland saying more than one team was being looked at I suspect it was really driven by the PA all along and they were just lying in wait for something to try to bring up.
Possibly, or perhaps his case made them push on it in other scenarios as well.

darth5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 04:50 PM
  #153
gopreds19
Formerly gobears19
 
gopreds19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,237
vCash: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
so the next question is are the Preds bound by the league to abide by what the arbiter says or would they have recourse to file suit in court if they disagree with the arbiter?

I could see an individual player not wanting to get tied up in a prolonged legal battle and going ahead and signing regardless ofwhether the NHLPA is trying to make a test case out of it.
I would imagine the Preds would be bound by the arbiter's decision. If it did go to court, I imagine the PA would represent the player, and the player wouldn't have to get to caught up in it.

gopreds19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:02 PM
  #154
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gopreds19 View Post
I would imagine the Preds would be bound by the arbiter's decision. If it did go to court, I imagine the PA would represent the player, and the player wouldn't have to get to caught up in it.
Arbitration in these matters is almost always binding.

barrytrotzsneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:02 PM
  #155
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 15,295
vCash: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by gopreds19 View Post
I would imagine the Preds would be bound by the arbiter's decision. If it did go to court, I imagine the PA would represent the player, and the player wouldn't have to get to caught up in it.
where I was going with that was, a player would be foolish to sign with another team and risk having that contract invalidated(say in september, too late to get a deal with anyone else) if a court sided with the preds

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:16 PM
  #156
OpenWheel
Registered User
 
OpenWheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Keweenaw Peninsula
Country: United States
Posts: 1,971
vCash: 500
Preds need to pull a U. of Kentucky and pay someone to say they found the faxes.

OpenWheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:27 PM
  #157
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
where I was going with that was, a player would be foolish to sign with another team and risk having that contract invalidated(say in september, too late to get a deal with anyone else) if a court sided with the preds
The players will stay RFA until a decision is made, at which point they would become UFA in the event that the arbiter ruled in favor of the PA. I don't think there's an appeal process that could see them re-rendered RFA. There's really not a good scenario here, unfortunately. With no real precedent, we're faced with a huge gamble. Overpay them to get them to sign in advance of the arbitration, or wait it out and risk a bad ruling that sees some good young players in a thin market that suddenly can go anywhere they want for any price.

barrytrotzsneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:33 PM
  #158
Roman Yoshi
Ellis too short
 
Roman Yoshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Franklin, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,897
vCash: 500
This is an absolute disaster...

Roman Yoshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:35 PM
  #159
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenWheel View Post
Preds need to pull a U. of Kentucky and pay someone to say they found the faxes.
I was thinking the exact same thing. Pull a Tubby Smith and magically find the fax.

SmokeyClause is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:44 PM
  #160
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
wouldnt you not also argue that if the intent of the rule was that players must have their offer in hand by the time limit that there would have to be some burden on the player to acknowledge receipt of the offer? and that the player would be compelled to provide an address that could be verified?
No that would not be necessary, just proof of actual delivery to the address which would come from the courier. The burden in this case properly falls on the team who is seeking to retain its RFA rights over the player.

The general contract rule in common law jurisdictions is that tender requires actual delivery of an offer to the other party to be effective.

The contention of the Preds and the NHL is what governs in this instance is referred to as the "postbox rule" (Canada and UK) or "mailbox rule" in the US. It is an exception to the general rule and is not the usual practise because the offer would be deemed received without the need for actual receipt.

The problem with this exception and interpreting the CBA the way contended by the Preds and NHL is what if the offer is not ever in fact received. Best practise if I was advising a team would be send send the QO's a minimum of one day prior to deadline AND follow up to ensure that the notice was in fact delivered to the player off-season address.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:45 PM
  #161
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 101st_fan View Post
Tendered has always been interpreted as the offer being made, not necessarily received.
That is not correct.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 05:47 PM
  #162
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
so the next question is are the Preds bound by the league to abide by what the arbiter says or would they have recourse to file suit in court if they disagree with the arbiter?

I could see an individual player not wanting to get tied up in a prolonged legal battle and going ahead and signing regardless ofwhether the NHLPA is trying to make a test case out of it.
The decision of the Arbitrator is final as provided in the CBA.

In this case the grievance process is controlled by the NHLPA and not the the individual player.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 06:19 PM
  #163
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 15,295
vCash: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
The decision of the Arbitrator is final as provided in the CBA.

In this case the grievance process is controlled by the NHLPA and not the the individual player.
thank you for all of your insight.

now we get to see how well David Poile plays poker.

Im sure the 4 guys we want to keep will all get offers that expire the morning of the arbitration hearing.

If Im Halischuk or Spaling, if Poile makes any decent offer I go ahead and sign, earning some "team player" points.

If Im Oreilly, and poile offers multiple years, I'd sign. If he offers anything north of 800K, I'd sign.


I suspect Poile will offer SK a little more than he'd planned on offering, but if Im Poile I tell him that if he doesnt take the offer, and the arbiter rules in the Preds favor, then he gets his QO and not a dime more.

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 06:52 PM
  #164
Adz
Eudora Wannabe
 
Adz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Hermitage TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,863
vCash: 500
I don't see much difference here than in "intent to blow". If the Preds got the paperwork out the door by the time set forth in the CBA, then they "intended" to send out the qualifying agreements. It is wise to try to deliver early in the event that these things may happen, but sometimes you can't. Preds should have faxed it as well, in hindsight, and run a report stating the date, fax time, number and other proof, but as I read the "directions" they did what they were told to do. If they sent something via courier, the courier service will have a record of the call, the dispatch information, and the pick up time.

If there is a difference, then I want some of our goals back.

Adz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 07:12 PM
  #165
OpenWheel
Registered User
 
OpenWheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Keweenaw Peninsula
Country: United States
Posts: 1,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
now we get to see how well David Poile plays poker.
He timed out and his hand was folded while he was trying to make up his mind what to do.

OpenWheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 07:22 PM
  #166
kypredsfan
Weber is OUR captain
 
kypredsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenWheel View Post
Preds need to pull a U. of Kentucky and pay someone to say they found the faxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause View Post
I was thinking the exact same thing. Pull a Tubby Smith and magically find the fax.
Hey now!!!


That's my other fave team

kypredsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 07:39 PM
  #167
Neal Before Zod
Registered User
 
Neal Before Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kypredsfan View Post
Hey now!!!


That's my other fave team

Well bless your heart...

Neal Before Zod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 07:52 PM
  #168
kypredsfan
Weber is OUR captain
 
kypredsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashvols View Post
Well bless your heart...
I am blessed. Life is good in Big Blue country.

kypredsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 09:40 PM
  #169
TMI
Mod Supervisor
 
TMI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 45,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
In contract law the term "tender" means more than just making the offer - it is often deemed to include actual delivery of the offer.

The NHLPA contends that any past practise of putting the QO's in the hands of the overnight delivery service on the day of the deadline has been accompanied by a concurrent action in faxing the notice and QO to the agent.

The principle being that this would be a form of constructive notice to the player (actual receipt by his agent) that while not contemplated by the CBA, it has been accepted as a past practise. Failure to fax to the agent by the deadline (as apparently occurred) would not constitute a past practise sufficient to overcome the express terms of the CBA would be the argument that the NHLPA would likely make.
I'm not saying that you're wrong or anything, but could you point me towards information in regards to the bold part of your comment? I've been sitting here looking for an hour, and I'm unable to find any examples similar to our situation much less clarification of the term "tendered" itself. The only definitions I've found are "to offer" which still leaves room for interpretation (i.e. is it an offer until the intended recipient is in position of it?) so if you can point me into the right direction I'd be appreciative. I would just take your word for it, but I'm currently studying law and things like this interest me (obviously I haven't taken any courses in contract law yet)

TMI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 09:48 PM
  #170
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by darth5 View Post
This makes me wonder who is pushing this grievance strategy. If you look at the list of QO players involved, the only one I see that stands to gain a substantial bounty is SK47.

Think about it. Perhaps he and his agent were not at all satisfied with how negotiations are going with DP and he is still an RFA. How can he create leverage? Exploit this unclear language in the CBA by getting the NHLPA to throw a monkey wrench in. Three cases emerge:

1) Worst case: he gets the best contract he can negotiate if gambit fails.
2) a panic contract from Nashville at an inflated value to salvage their asset rights and keep him
3) Arbitrator rules in favor of NHLPA and he gets to hit the free market payday.

If I had to guess who pushed for this using the PA as fig-leaf cover, I say it is SK47.
Cause in this UFA crop he could stand to make 4 mil+ on the open market, not just 1.5mil x2 seasons

I know it's just an idea but it makes sense and speculating is fun.

Maybe he got all those points and played as hard as he could in order to get that big payday and now the GM isn't offering him one. Who knows.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 09:56 PM
  #171
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adz View Post
I don't see much difference here than in "intent to blow". If the Preds got the paperwork out the door by the time set forth in the CBA, then they "intended" to send out the qualifying agreements. It is wise to try to deliver early in the event that these things may happen, but sometimes you can't. Preds should have faxed it as well, in hindsight, and run a report stating the date, fax time, number and other proof, but as I read the "directions" they did what they were told to do. If they sent something via courier, the courier service will have a record of the call, the dispatch information, and the pick up time.

If there is a difference, then I want some of our goals back.
Contract law and CBA statutory interpretation is not the same category as the NHL rule book.

Intending to get it right is not good enough.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 10:14 PM
  #172
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdManIn View Post
I'm not saying that you're wrong or anything, but could you point me towards information in regards to the bold part of your comment? I've been sitting here looking for an hour, and I'm unable to find any examples similar to our situation much less clarification of the term "tendered" itself. The only definitions I've found are "to offer" which still leaves room for interpretation (i.e. is it an offer until the intended recipient is in position of it?) so if you can point me into the right direction I'd be appreciative. I would just take your word for it, but I'm currently studying law and things like this interest me (obviously I haven't taken any courses in contract law yet)
You need to look at law texts and cases on contract law. It has a technical legal meaning not something that you find in a general dictionary.

Generally the words tender and delivery are used interchangeably - so that to be effective a notice must be delivered in fact.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 10:53 PM
  #173
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 15,295
vCash: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
You need to look at law texts and cases on contract law. It has a technical legal meaning not something that you find in a general dictionary.

Generally the words tender and delivery are used interchangeably - so that to be effective a notice must be delivered in fact.
counterpoint: since both sides have apparently agreed that this issue is only for the arbiter to consider and is not truly a matter of law, in this instance the definition of "tender" and what it takes to have made a valid tender are whatever the CBA says it is, and if it is unclear, then it will be whatever the arbiter says it is...

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 11:05 PM
  #174
TMI
Mod Supervisor
 
TMI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 45,939
vCash: 500
edit: nevermind I think I found what I was looking for


Last edited by TMI: 06-30-2011 at 11:10 PM.
TMI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-01-2011, 12:25 AM
  #175
AEM6729
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
No that would not be necessary, just proof of actual delivery to the address which would come from the courier. The burden in this case properly falls on the team who is seeking to retain its RFA rights over the player.

The general contract rule in common law jurisdictions is that tender requires actual delivery of an offer to the other party to be effective.

The contention of the Preds and the NHL is what governs in this instance is referred to as the "postbox rule" (Canada and UK) or "mailbox rule" in the US. It is an exception to the general rule and is not the usual practise because the offer would be deemed received without the need for actual receipt.

The problem with this exception and interpreting the CBA the way contended by the Preds and NHL is what if the offer is not ever in fact received. Best practise if I was advising a team would be send send the QO's a minimum of one day prior to deadline AND follow up to ensure that the notice was in fact delivered to the player off-season address.
What about the fact that the CBA states if the player hasn't provided an address to the team, they can just send the QO to his last known address? Who knows if the player will be at that address or not? Doesn't that support the idea that "to tender" means to just send the QO by the deadline, and not necessarily have it in the player's hand at the deadline?

AEM6729 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 05:43 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.