Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Vinny Prospal traded to Tampa Bay for a 2nd round pick
a 2005 deaft pick, not bad at all especially in a deep draft. even though tampa will be on top the league and that pick will be a late pick in the 2nd round probably26-30. but its is a 2nd rd so no lose , and with stillman gone iot pays off for tb to get prospal back good for bothg teams.
I am fairly certain it was a 5 year, $20 million dollar deal
It was a 5 year, 16.5 million dollar deal. As others have noted, he received a 4 million dollar signing bonus. So essentially it's a 5 year deal at 2.5 million per year. So last year he made 2.5 million in salary plus the 4 million bonus. So Tampa assumes the remaining 4 years and 10 million of the deal.
I think that the fact you got such a high pick suggests that Prospal's bonus wasn't covered.
Prospal
for
2nd rounder
sounds a lot more reasonable than
Prospal
for
2nd rounder, 4 million cash
Bryan Murray would have asked for at least part of the bonus from Tampa, but new Duck GM Coates might have sent Prospal away without worrying about that. Who knows for sure?
I didn't mean to insinuate that the Bolts covered the whole bonus. Perhaps just a portion. My guess is around 1.5M to cover the remainder of the 4M that Coates wanted to cut.
Doubt it. As Sotnos says, at that point why not just keep Stillman and not lose the 2nd rounder in a good draft year?
I highly doubt they're sending any money back to ANA.
Not sure if this was mentioned in the thread........but Tampa has the right to match any offer under 80% of the arbitrator's ruling for Stillman.
80% of 3.9 mil is 3.12 million. Is there any GM that would actually offer Stillman that much? Is there a GM that would offer him 2.5 million?
Although I assume Jay Feaster already explored the possibility of a multiyear deal around 2.5 million to Stillman and his agent. If he didn't, perhaps he jumped the gun on getting Prospal back?
Stillman had a great year (statistically, at least). However, he is ultimately a second line winger with some deficits in his game. Prospal, Parrish, and other second line wingers of that ilk are currently earning in the neighborhood of a about 2.5 million. So, in my view, anything more than that for Stillman would be a serious overpayment.
Not sure if this was mentioned in the thread........but Tampa has the right to match any offer under 80% of the arbitrator's ruling for Stillman.
80% of 3.9 mil is 3.12 million. Is there any GM that would actually offer Stillman that much? Is there a GM that would offer him 2.5 million?
Although I assume Jay Feaster already explored the possibility of a multiyear deal around 2.5 million to Stillman and his agent. If he didn't, perhaps he jumped the gun on getting Prospal back?
I think Feaster's comment that he never wanted Proposal to leave says he didn't jump the gun.
Also, Prospal is tied down at 2.5 mil for the next 3 yrs. They locked in a player and avoided a salary wildcard in Stillman. Good move.
Another bad signing by the Ducks to piggy back their miraculous Cup run.
I didn't mean to insinuate that the Bolts covered the whole bonus. Perhaps just a portion. My guess is around 1.5M to cover the remainder of the 4M that Coates wanted to cut.
According to the Tampa Tribune: Tampa Bay will not give the Mighty Ducks any money to offset the signing bonus Prospal received last season.
That is the most outlandish arbitration award I have ever heard.
Again according to the Tampa Tribune, Stillman was scheduled to have an arbitration hearing with the Lightning on Sunday, but team spokesman Bill Wickett told The Associated Press that Stillman and Feaster worked out a deal Thursday that would have the forward receive a $3.9 million award from an arbiter - the amount the Lightning expected he would be given following a hearing.
So it wasn't an arbitration award, both sides agreed to present the same number to the arbitrator. Help me out here. Given this, do the Lightning still have the ability to match an award below 80% of the arbitrator's award, and if so, wasn't it in their best interest to have the award as high as possible to reduce the chance that someone would give him that amount? And finally, could Stillman still be Tampa property after this is all said and done?
Not to get OT, but this is why I'm banging the drum that Bettman and NHL owners need not worry about pining for a hardcap that they will never get.
Rather focus on emasculating the ridiculous arbitration process which artifically inflates salaries leaguewide annually. Insist that player's arbitration rights are limited severely (say, once or twice prior to their FA years), and you will see salaries level out.
Again according to the Tampa Tribune, Stillman was scheduled to have an arbitration hearing with the Lightning on Sunday, but team spokesman Bill Wickett told The Associated Press that Stillman and Feaster worked out a deal Thursday that would have the forward receive a $3.9 million award from an arbiter - the amount the Lightning expected he would be given following a hearing.
So it wasn't an arbitration award, both sides agreed to present the same number to the arbitrator. Help me out here. Given this, do the Lightning still have the ability to match an award below 80% of the arbitrator's award, and if so, wasn't it in their best interest to have the award as high as possible to reduce the chance that someone would give him that amount? And finally, could Stillman still be Tampa property after this is all said and done?
That makes literally no sense. If they agreed to a deal then they obviously couldn't walk away from the arbitration award. If they agreed to a deal, they couldn't get out of it at all unless they bought him out.
Not to get OT, but this is why I'm banging the drum that Bettman and NHL owners need not worry about pining for a hardcap that they will never get.
Rather focus on emasculating the ridiculous arbitration process which artifically inflates salaries leaguewide annually. Insist that player's arbitration rights are limited severely (say, once or twice prior to their FA years), and you will see salaries level out.
Can you list me any players at all who've gone to arbitration more than twice? Players can't go to arbitration until their 2nd contract is finished. So your suggestion is pretty much already in effect.
I don't really understand how that would change a thing.
Demitra for $6.5 million wasn't the most outlandish arbitration award?
I agree with you that Stillman's award was just plain rediculous, but there have been worse.
Leclair's was worse (7 million I think.)
But I'd much rather have Demitra at 6.5 than Stillman at 3.9. Personally I think that's about twice at much as Stillman is really worth. Of course Stillman is a former Flame and thus my opinion of him is biased because of how much of a floater he was when he was here. Had all the talent to be a top tier NHL player but none of the drive. What a frustrating player to watch. I'd rather watch a less talented guy utilize his ability to the best he can than watch a very talented player show up for a couple shifts a game.
Again according to the Tampa Tribune, Stillman was scheduled to have an arbitration hearing with the Lightning on Sunday, but team spokesman Bill Wickett told The Associated Press that Stillman and Feaster worked out a deal Thursday that would have the forward receive a $3.9 million award from an arbiter - the amount the Lightning expected he would be given following a hearing.
So it wasn't an arbitration award, both sides agreed to present the same number to the arbitrator. Help me out here. Given this, do the Lightning still have the ability to match an award below 80% of the arbitrator's award, and if so, wasn't it in their best interest to have the award as high as possible to reduce the chance that someone would give him that amount? And finally, could Stillman still be Tampa property after this is all said and done?
yes- you are correct here. the same thing happened with bryan berard last year. essentially, o'connell came up with a figure he thought was too high for other teams to pay (80% of the figure he handed to the arbiter). berard and his agent accepted the award immediately, and OC then used his walk-away power. if stillman gets anything less than 3.12 million, tampa can match. of course, that's over a full season, so what happened with berard last year was that chicago offered him the necessary 80% (plus a tad more)...but they only paid a pro-rated part of the contract, since he signed after the season began.
That makes literally no sense. If they agreed to a deal then they obviously couldn't walk away from the arbitration award. If they agreed to a deal, they couldn't get out of it at all unless they bought him out.
That part of the article must be wrong.
They didn't agree to a contract and the Bolts didn't just release him. They agreed to both support the same arbitration amount and have the arbitrator award that amount. That has the effect, if I am correct, of making Stillman a free agent. If he signs somewhere for $3.12 or more the Bolts get no compensation. If he can't find anyone willing to pay him the $3.12, the Bolts have the right to match.
Stillman gets what he wants, the ability to find out his worth on the free market and, if the Bolts are right that he isn't worth $3.12, the Bolts get what they want, Stillman back for $3.12 or less.
Can you list me any players at all who've gone to arbitration more than twice? Players can't go to arbitration until their 2nd contract is finished. So your suggestion is pretty much already in effect.
I don't really understand how that would change a thing.
Then let's limit it to a player having the right to one arbitration hearing, between ages 23 or so and 31. That is, five years after being drafted the player gains that right. He can use it once between then and the time he gains FA status (currently 31).
Couple that a mandatory minimum % increase in a all players' salaries, year-to-year, based on collective league revenue. And the team's right to walk away. this would ensure a fair cost-of living increase for players, yet also ensure cost certainty for ownership. And the arbitration process would be a mechanism, deployed sparingly, to truly ensure that a player's salary stays on par with what the market suggests he should be earning, not a tool for inflating the going rate for all salaries. Addressed this in detail in another thread recently; not appropriate to do so here.
They didn't agree to a contract and the Bolts didn't just release him. They agreed to both support the same arbitration amount and have the arbitrator award that amount.
That makes more sense. Thanks for the clarification.
:mad: 
