How would Ottawa provide proof? Providing a fax slip or email is proof if the condition was met - there is no equivalent for proving something "didn't" happen.
Confirmed Trade: [ANA/VGK] Evgenii Dadonov, cond. 2023/24 2nd round pick for John Moore, Ryan Kesler [OFFICIALLY VOIDED]
- Thread starter MMC
- Start date
The Marquis
Moderator
Very easy. At this point Ottawa can contact Dadonov's agent in writing to ask for proof of the proper and timely submission of said list. Failure to provide said proof is proof that something "didn't happen".How would Ottawa provide proof? Providing a fax slip or email is proof if the condition was met - there is no equivalent for proving something "didn't" happen.
Panda Bear
Registered User
- Apr 2, 2010
- 6,572
- 5,703
That's not logically sound.
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: The Argument from Ignorance
The ad ignorantiam (the argument from ignorance) is characterized and shown to be sometimes persuasive but normally fallacious.
philosophy.lander.edu
mouser
Business of Hockey
Vegas is operating in LTIR space, meaning all transactions use the full AAV of the contract.
Vegas could trade Dadonov on the final day of the season and gain just as much free space as if they traded him on the deadline.
That's not logically sound.
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: The Argument from Ignorance
The ad ignorantiam (the argument from ignorance) is characterized and shown to be sometimes persuasive but normally fallacious.
Actually it's pretty sensible. Ottawa tells Dadonov/his agent that their position is a 10-team list wasn't received by the deadline, and if they disagree to let them know. I've read in this case Dadonov's agent received a confirmation it was received on time.
The Agent could just ignore Ottawa's request and surprise them later on with the proof.
The Marquis
Moderator
You're not wrong, but that wasn't exactly what I was getting at with saying that. So I'll explain. It's safe to assume that an agent isn't going to directly intentionally act against the wishes of his client. If the list is there, it's there, if it's not, IT'S NOT and it'll eventually come out in the wash if they fail to provide. Them failing to provide the proof is eventually going to come back to them, as this Dadonov mess proves unquestionably. Does the agent failing to provide it hold up in court ALONE, no it doesn't, but it's normal to assume the agent provides either the proper proof or acknowledges that they do not have it, the logical exception being if the agent messed up and didn't file it properly, at which point feigning ignorance is covering up a failure to act according to the contract with the client... again it'll eventually be exposed if the player gets traded to a team on their no-trade list.That's not logically sound.
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: The Argument from Ignorance
The ad ignorantiam (the argument from ignorance) is characterized and shown to be sometimes persuasive but normally fallacious.
So, (I'm not saying this is what happened, but providing a hypothetical) if Vegas asked Ottawa to show proof that the list is invalid or that the list exists, assuming you can't talk to a player who isn't under contract to you, Ottawa would then have to check their records, if they had no records, they can approach the agent to show them the acknowledgement, if at that point the agent fails to do so, Ottawa should go back to Vegas and say "we can't provide this information at this time" (A great reason not to try tricky stuff so close to the deadline). If that doesn't happen and the agent provides it, you have it in writing and have done your due diligence and can make the most informed decision. If Vegas still makes the trade here, they'd have the proof they need and the Anaheim deal never happens.
Now, if the proof never shows up and not doing their due diligence, Vegas moves forward anyway, you have a different scenario. If after the Anaheim deal the agent claims Dadonov had Anaheim on his no-trade list, it turned out that they submitted it late, or through improper channels and didn't get an acknowledgement, OR if the agent claimed ignorance, Dadonov is a Duck. Ignorance only works so long as the proof isn't needed at some point down the line and I'd bet no agent thinks that's a good idea in the case of no-trade lists. Since the list WAS there and submitted properly, Dadonov is a Knight.
Vegas could speak with Dadanov's agent, with Ottawa's consent.
If Ottawa can't produce the list or written confirmation that there is no list, then Vegas could insist that Ottawa give their consent in writing for Vegas to speak with Dadanov and/or his agent, and follow-up on their own before they finalize the deal.
It's pretty basic due diligence.
The Marquis
Moderator
Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure how it worked within an entity like a sports league where all entities are a part of it.
ManByng
It's Me OilTastic
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,782
- 30,981
So, the NHL just takes a team at its word that a NTC list wasn't sent? So, had Vegas been on the list when Ottawa initially traded him there, the NHL would have approved that trade?
Seems like in a case where it's assumed a portion of a players contract is voided as a result of a perceived inaction, it would incumbent on the league to validate it, maybe confirm with the agents office prior to approving the trade? I mean, that's the whole point of the trade call right, and the role of the NHL head office in this process, to make sure all the T's are crossed and i's dotted, that the rules have been followed?
I mean, this same embarassing scenario could have happened to any team with something as absurd as an updated trade list email from and agent ending up in the spam folder.
Seems like in a case where it's assumed a portion of a players contract is voided as a result of a perceived inaction, it would incumbent on the league to validate it, maybe confirm with the agents office prior to approving the trade? I mean, that's the whole point of the trade call right, and the role of the NHL head office in this process, to make sure all the T's are crossed and i's dotted, that the rules have been followed?
I mean, this same embarassing scenario could have happened to any team with something as absurd as an updated trade list email from and agent ending up in the spam folder.
Hamilton Bulldogs
Registered User
- Jan 11, 2022
- 3,608
- 4,958
If they continue to play Dadonov alongside Eichel it seems pretty obvious to me that he will earn his contract; he has demonstrated throughout his career that he can be a 30-goal guy playing with a 1C but is a JAG without one.
So maybe VGK keeps him and finds another way to activate Stone if he can play? LTIRing Pacioretty perhaps?
So maybe VGK keeps him and finds another way to activate Stone if he can play? LTIRing Pacioretty perhaps?
Coincidentally, Pacioretty has been moved to LTIR, although I'm not sure why he wasn't there already since he's only played a handful of games all year (probably because of all the other injuries it wasn't necessary to move him to LTIR).
The VGK organization certainly has egg on its face for not knowing everything about ED's contract and limitations, especially since they first started talking about trading him as early as November. Somebody dropped the ball in a major sort of way, and that somebody's head should roll (and, with Foley, who has a low tolerance for failure, probably will).
However, Vegas luck -- with recent other injuries, it looks like ED will not be as disposable as he was once thought to be and so his contract being voided is the rare silver lining in what has been a thunderstorm of bad luck all year. And, yes, ED seems to be another player altogether with Eichel.
Last edited:
