Deadline for QO

[Wildman]

Deadline for Qualifying Offer is June 30th, 2010 and should be submitted to Richie. Please note that only one file will be accepted from each GM.

Click to read more...

 

[Ohio Jones]

What should teams do who have already submitted QOs to a Swingstein?

 

[Wildman]

I guess they sit tight and wait for the agent to either accept the QO or they declare them RFA.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

and the players continue to have as much time as they want to accept the offers?

there should be a deadline where the team who has issued the QO maintains the rights but not longer is obligated to offer the QO amount if it has not been accepted.

the player should not have an indefinite period before the QO has to be accepted, they dont in the NHL, why here?

 

[Wildman]

and the players continue to have as much time as they want to accept the offers?

there should be a deadline where the team who has issued the QO maintains the rights but not longer is obligated to offer the QO amount if it has not been accepted.

the player should not have an indefinite period before the QO has to be accepted, they dont in the NHL, why here?

The GM has the option of withdrawing a QO before the plater accepts it and I might as well add that one is forcing GM to offer a QO.

 

[Ohio Jones]

The GM has the option of withdrawing a QO before the plater accepts it and I might as well add that one is forcing GM to offer a QO.

Not sure I understand what you're saying here, Hasnain. Could you explain it in more detail, please?

<--- Daddy brain

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

The GM has the option of withdrawing a QO before the plater accepts it and I might as well add that one is forcing GM to offer a QO.

first off, let me state i have no horse in this race as I have no RFA to QO.

that said:

1) once a QO is put forward, it stands and can not be retracted
2) the point i am making is that once the QO is offered, the player should have a reasonable time to accept it. if they pass thinking there is a better off in the market, the team that issued the QO should still maintain that players rights and no longer is obligated to the QO amount.

this isnt about anything other than a fair and equitable process. the player has no risk if they QO is open ended until they feel like accepting it.

in the NHL, the player has a period to accept it and then the QO is no longer on the table, why isnt it like that in our league?

 

[Cartered]

Is there any form of salary arbitration if the player and the team holding his rights can't come to an agreement?

 

[Wildman]

first off, let me state i have no horse in this race as I have no RFA to QO.

that said:

1) once a QO is put forward, it stands and can not be retracted
2) the point i am making is that once the QO is offered, the player should have a reasonable time to accept it. if they pass thinking there is a better off in the market, the team that issued the QO should still maintain that players rights and no longer is obligated to the QO amount.

this isnt about anything other than a fair and equitable process. the player has no risk if they QO is open ended until they feel like accepting it.

in the NHL, the player has a period to accept it and then the QO is no longer on the table, why isnt it like that in our league?

I am okay with this as long as the player can go on you prospect list and is able to sign with any teams. We have seen this happen in NHL so why not HFNHL. I think you also need to realize we have 2 agents dealing with 900 players.

 

[Wildman]

Not sure I understand what you're saying here, Hasnain. Could you explain it in more detail, please?

<--- Daddy brain

What I am saying is that you can pull the QO before June 30th and the player becomes UFA. I have given each team till midnight of June 30th to submit their QO and will take couple of days to put the list together and than the free agency starts. I don't know how much time is a lot of time for players being offered QO.

 

[Wildman]

Is there any form of salary arbitration if the player and the team holding his rights can't come to an agreement?

No we don't have salary Arbitration

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

I am okay with this as long as the player can go on you prospect list and is able to sign with any teams. We have seen this happen in NHL so why not HFNHL. I think you also need to realize we have 2 agents dealing with 900 players.

if its a matter of the workload, then i support whatever decision is necessary to streamline the labour burden.

however, i think in this case its just a matter of process that has been overlooked.

no, if the QO is not accepted, im suggesting the option to honour that contract now becomes at the teams discretion. if they do not choose to honour the QO after the deadline, then they will have to negotiate a new deal with the agent and until that time the player is on the prospect list. however, the team should not lose his rights. the rights were protected by offering the QO to begin with.

am i the only one who is following this? i will back down if its of no interest to anyone else.

 

[Wildman]

if its a matter of the workload, then i support whatever decision is necessary to streamline the labour burden.

however, i think in this case its just a matter of process that has been overlooked.

no, if the QO is not accepted, im suggesting the option to honour that contract now becomes at the teams discretion. if they do not choose to honour the QO after the deadline, then they will have to negotiate a new deal with the agent and until that time the player is on the prospect list. however, the team should not lose his rights. the rights were protected by offering the QO to begin with.

am i the only one who is following this? i will back down if its of no interest to anyone else.

I am not saying that the team losses their matching rights but the player should have the right to sign with any teams that he chooses to do so. We see this in NHL so why not in HFNHL.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

I am not saying that the team losses their matching rights but the player should have the right to sign with any teams that he chooses to do so. We see this in NHL so why not in HFNHL.

agreed, nothing changes in respect to the players RFA rights, but he no longer has the QO to fall back on. its something for the player to weigh before he lets the deadline pass.

 

[Cartered]

I think Robb's saying that with no deadline for the player to accept the QO, there's no reason for him not to wait and see if a better offer comes from another team. In real life, a player would have to either sign the qualifying offer or risk not getting an offer period. The QO shouldn't be a guarantee that the player can fall back on whenever he wants. If there's no deadline on the player to take the QO, that player effectively has all the leverage. Players would be a lot less adventurous in expecting offers from other teams if the QO wasn't guaranteed to be on the table at all times.

 

[Wildman]

I think Robb's saying that with no deadline for the player to accept the QO, there's no reason for him not to wait and see if a better offer comes from another team. In real life, a player would have to either sign the qualifying offer or risk not getting an offer period. The QO shouldn't be a guarantee that the player can fall back on whenever he wants. If there's no deadline on the player to take the QO, that player effectively has all the leverage. Players would be a lot less adventurous in expecting offers from other teams if the QO wasn't guaranteed to be on the table at all times.

I know exactly what Robb is saying and I have no issue with it because most of the QO are for players who have not played a single game in the NHL. However, when you see a player being offered a QO which is much less than his NHL salary than there is an issue and other teams are hesitant to move forward with offering RFA contract due backlashing or they don't want to give up high draft picks. Last season, we lost one GM because he wasn't aware that his players were offered RFA offers and the other was hated by everyone for signing anyone who could move.

I think GM has a lot more to lose if a player goes to prospect list because as soon as he shows some promise he will be offered much higher contract by other GM if he is exposed as unsigned RFA.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

I think GM has a lot more to lose if a player goes to prospect list because as soon as he shows some promise he will be offered much higher contract by other GM if he is exposed as unsigned RFA.

its a perfect blend of risk for both parties which is part of the gamesmanship we all seek.

thanks, good discussion!

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

First of all Robb, you've brought this up now multiple times over the last several seasons (based on some past frustration as I recall). I have to say, it's getting a tad old.

But since it's been brought up again, let's run through it again.

The first point, is as Hasnain has said, the agents have lives, volunteer a tremendous amount of time, and it simply makes it a lot easier to have all of the QO's come in, then deal with them in one fell swoop before free agency starts. In the NHL, players have, like, these agents who work full time and everything. That's the first reason we don't work exactly like the NHL. It's these volunteer agents, I might add, that allow GM's like you that have never volunteered time to help, enjoy this league (only dig, I promise).

Regardless, this does not stop a team from making other offers to the player before they become a potential RFA.

Regarding why the QO should stand for a lengthy period, is as follows...

Following the beginning of free agency, it takes a few rounds to run through multiple offers. This takes several weeks at least, and often isn't sorted out for a month or more. Many of these offers involve potential RFA offer sheets, but they are prioritized, so many are not signed in the first round, and even in the second round. And it's not until the second round is complete, that teams consider offer sheets given they don't know where their roster stands yet. In the NHL, this is much more free-wheeling and dynamic process and we simply can't replicate this to have a timeline on the QO's that perhaps they have in the NHL (does anyone know the timeline anyway?).

Either way, it takes some time. Last year as an example, there were RFA offer sheets that were signed in the second round of free agency, and given that teams get a period of time to either match or not, these weren't sorted out until September.

At that time, the agents are doing a final look at QO's and other offers that came in from teams that they are now seriously considering. The reality is this is a time when teams sign the remaining RFA's to very reasonable (i.e low) deals, because the player has lost all leverage. As agents, we don't play hard ball at this time, but rather focus on getting people signed.

You've been a round sevaral years, so I'm surprised you haven't figured this out (ok, one more dig, sorry).

So should the QO offer stand forever? No. But Sept 15th seems like a reasonable date at least. After that, perhaps sending the player to the prospect list might make sense. But here's the thing - that HAS been done before, and it doesn't really matter in reality, because the players who will sign their QO's will have by that point, so you might as well put them on your prospect list or increase your offer (those are few and far between).

Does that make sense? Can we put a bullet in this sucker yet?

 

[Ohio Jones]

Am I to understand that the suggestion is that the player loses the guaranteed minimum contract amount if he doesn't accept ht eQO?

For example, I have one remaining RFA, Scottie Upshall. His current HFNHL contract is $1.5M, so I can retain his rights by offering him a QO of 1 year at $1.5M.

If for some reason he chooses not to accept that offer, then as of June 30 he becomes an RFA -- but an RFA who can no longer automatically fall back on my initial QO of 1yr/$1.5M... so if he out on the market as an RFA, and nobody offers him more, then I'm no longer bound by the $1.5 M and can attempt to re-sign him for less than that?

(Of course, with Upshall, there won't be any lack of RFA offers if he in fact does not sign an extension with Columbus prior to July 1st, but you get what I'm asking.)

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Am I to understand that the suggestion is that the player loses the guaranteed minimum contract amount if he doesn't accept ht eQO?

For example, I have one remaining RFA, Scottie Upshall. His current HFNHL contract is $1.5M, so I can retain his rights by offering him a QO of 1 year at $1.5M.

If for some reason he chooses not to accept that offer, then as of June 30 he becomes an RFA -- but an RFA who can no longer automatically fall back on my initial QO of 1yr/$1.5M... so if he out on the market as an RFA, and nobody offers him more, then I'm no longer bound by the $1.5 M and can attempt to re-sign him for less than that?

(Of course, with Upshall, there won't be any lack of RFA offers if he in fact does not sign an extension with Columbus prior to July 1st, but you get what I'm asking.)

thats what i am suggesting should be the case ...

sorry if i offended anyone by bringing it up again ...

 

[Wildman]

Am I to understand that the suggestion is that the player loses the guaranteed minimum contract amount if he doesn't accept ht eQO?

For example, I have one remaining RFA, Scottie Upshall. His current HFNHL contract is $1.5M, so I can retain his rights by offering him a QO of 1 year at $1.5M.

If for some reason he chooses not to accept that offer, then as of June 30 he becomes an RFA -- but an RFA who can no longer automatically fall back on my initial QO of 1yr/$1.5M... so if he out on the market as an RFA, and nobody offers him more, then I'm no longer bound by the $1.5 M and can attempt to re-sign him for less than that?

(Of course, with Upshall, there won't be any lack of RFA offers if he in fact does not sign an extension with Columbus prior to July 1st, but you get what I'm asking.)

I don't think Upshall will go under $1.5M...what you will have is an opportunity to tie him up for long contract at a much lower amount than what he would have asked before the free agency.

 

[Wildman]

thats what i am suggesting should be the case ...

sorry if i offended anyone by bringing it up again ...

I don't think you have offended anyone and it is good to have a discussion so everyone is clear. The free agency process takes a bit of time and our priority is to get through star players before getting to lower tier players. All this takes time so haveing a deadline is unreasonable.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

Am I to understand that the suggestion is that the player loses the guaranteed minimum contract amount if he doesn't accept ht eQO?

For example, I have one remaining RFA, Scottie Upshall. His current HFNHL contract is $1.5M, so I can retain his rights by offering him a QO of 1 year at $1.5M.

If for some reason he chooses not to accept that offer, then as of June 30 he becomes an RFA -- but an RFA who can no longer automatically fall back on my initial QO of 1yr/$1.5M... so if he out on the market as an RFA, and nobody offers him more, then I'm no longer bound by the $1.5 M and can attempt to re-sign him for less than that?

(Of course, with Upshall, there won't be any lack of RFA offers if he in fact does not sign an extension with Columbus prior to July 1st, but you get what I'm asking.)

I'm not sure this is really applicable. The reason being is that the agents generally only test RFA waters if the QO is below or just very close to their market value. They want to see if the RFA market will bring them back up to their market value. If this is the case, even if the player doesn't get an offer sheet, it doesn't mean if a team "pulls back their QO" that the player is going to accept less. On the contrary, the bottom line is the team should be happy the player takes the QO!

Now perhaps there are cases with minor leaguers who have limited value and for some reason the GM signed them to a more lucrative deal than they should have (again, the GM made this bed..._), and wants to negotiate the deal down. This does happen in the NHL, but as far as I know, only after the player has been made available on the open market. This sometimes applies when a team bids on a college UFA for a lucrative deal and the player doesn't turn out, but this is the GM's problem and this is always a case of hit or miss.

Am I missing something here, or are there a bunch of examples someone can pull out here so we can understand where this applies? In our league, teams benefit from all deals automatically being two-way deals, so this really doesn't make that much sense.

 

[Canuck09]

Am I missing something here, or are there a bunch of examples someone can pull out here so we can understand where this applies? In our league, teams benefit from all deals automatically being two-way deals, so this really doesn't make that much sense.

I understand what Rob is asking for, but I also have always missed the point a little as you might be here too Nick.

If a player turns down his QO it's generally because it's well below his NHL market value. I don't see why that player should be forced to take less than a QO just because no team is willing to step up and pay him right away. We're tied to NHL contracts, regardless of if we think it's fair or not, and most of the time they are well above QOs so being able to retract that minimum value doesn't seem like it will have any impact on 90% of the RFAs.

The only example I can think of on my team is Marcel Goc. I'm not sure how he got signed to a $907k contract right now but he did at some point. In the NHL this year he made $550k and he's signed a 1 year extension for $775k. Now I've got no option to auto sign him for $775k because it's below his current HFNHL contract. I've also been turned down in my attempts to sign him to a 3 year contract at a 10% raise because the agent feels he's worth more than that long term I guess. If I left him with a QO, no one gave him an offer sheet during FA and he went back onto my prospect list, I should have the option to offer less than the QO offer amount to sign him....this is what Robb is after. Granted we're only talking $200k here but at deals below $1M that's a pretty huge deal.

But again, these cases are fairly rare and in most cases another GM will be more than happy to sign someone like Goc for $1M in FA so the threat of retracting the QO is moot.

 

[Ohio Jones]

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that Upshall should sign for $1.5 million, or less, even - I was just trying to understand the mechanism being described. In Upshall's case I've submitted the QO to qualify him, but I fully intend to submit a multi-year offer at a higher price tag to get him under contract before July 1st.

But if the example is Player X, who is earning substantially more in the HFNHL than he is in the NHL, but the agent chooses to test free agency anyway, then I can see Robb's point that the team who made the QO should retain his rights, but not be required to necessarily pony up the full amount -- the player agent would have to go back to the team (as the only team that made an offer for the player's services) and try and negotiate a deal that works for both parties, even if it involves dialing back from their previous HFNHL contract, some of which we can all agree are inflated by previous FA years, among other things.