Deadline for QO

[Dr.Sens(e)]

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.

Goc is a greatexample. San Jose didn't like his NHL deal, didn't want to qualify him, so let him become a UFA. He then got less with the Preds, which was the best offer out there. Obviously the Sharks didn't think he was even worth that, or they could have resigned him on the open market.

You now have the same choice with Goc. 'Overpay' him to a degree, in order to retain his rights in hopes he bounces back, or let him become a UFA and re-bid on him on the open market hoping no one outbids you on a lesser deal. If the offers are close, he'll likey re-sign with his previous team (unlike the NHL, I might add). But expecting him to take less without testing the open market doesn't happen in the NHL, and it shouldn't happen in the HFNHL.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

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.

That's all well and good, but who are these Player X's? It's a hypothetical without any examples to relate to. The bottom line is if a QO is significantly more than the player is earning in the NHL (as in this example), the agent will have the player take the QO. This happens the vast majority of the time and I'm not sure where this idea of all of these guys turning down QO's that are way above what they are worth. Keep in mind the cast majority of RFA's DO sign before our free agency period begins, and many of them simply accept QO's.

The only exception MIGHT be if the player has had a massive break-out season, but I don't think these are the types of players we're talking about here.

I understand the point trying to be made here, I just don't understand why it's being made given it doesn't happen with any degree of regularity. We're suggesting a new rule without one example of a real HFNHL situation it will prevent? And even if there is an example or two, this isn't something that hinders players getting signed before the start of the next season. If I'm a bit frustrated, it's because we're wasting time discussing a new rule to no end. We have enough other stuff to figure out for new rules etc in the league, rather than waste time on these hypotheticals.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

But expecting him to take less without testing the open market doesn't happen in the NHL, and it shouldn't happen in the HFNHL.

im not suggesting he should take less ... im suggesting its a risk the player has to measure against.. does he take the QO or does he let the deadline pass in hopes that someone offers him more than the QO.

simple and you are right it doesnt affect a lot of players, i just felt there was a hole in the logic flow and was simply suggesting we clarify it.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

im not suggesting he should take less ... im suggesting its a risk the player has to measure against.. does he take the QO or does he let the deadline pass in hopes that someone offers him more than the QO.

simple and you are right it doesnt affect a lot of players, i just felt there was a hole in the logic flow and was simply suggesting we clarify it.

But that's the thing, in general the risk is the player will HAVE to sign the QO, because he now has no choice, or alternatively take a longer term deal because he couldn't muster interest in an offer sheet and now must lower his demands with his team. Keep in mind, they only turn down the QO because it's below market value generally, so the team having the player sign the QO after free agency actually means you are getting the guy at a discount.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

But that's the thing, in general the risk is the player will HAVE to sign the QO, because he now has no choice, or alternatively take a longer term deal because he couldn't muster interest in an offer sheet and now must lower his demands with his team. Keep in mind, they only turn down the QO because it's below market value generally, so the team having the player sign the QO after free agency actually means you are getting the guy at a discount.

no, the player simply has to accept the QO before the deadline and he gets the full amount ... if he passes and no one offers more and the team feels he isnt worth that amount any more either, why shouldnt the player have to accept less?

anyhow ... i agree its not going to affect alot of players, so why cant we just establish a deadline and see how it plays out.

 

[Wildman]

no, the player simply has to accept the QO before the deadline and he gets the full amount ... if he passes and no one offers more and the team feels he isnt worth that amount any more either, why shouldnt the player have to accept less?

anyhow ... i agree its not going to affect alot of players, so why cant we just establish a deadline and see how it plays out.

So what deadline do you suggest? The last day to submit QO is June 30th, 2010 so the deadline should be after June 30th, 2010.

 

[MatthewFlames]

<--- Daddy brain

Awesome!!!!!

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

no, the player simply has to accept the QO before the deadline and he gets the full amount ... if he passes and no one offers more and the team feels he isnt worth that amount any more either, why shouldnt the player have to accept less?

anyhow ... i agree its not going to affect alot of players, so why cant we just establish a deadline and see how it plays out.

What difference will it make? If a team takes back the QO, which was already below market value, and is now faced with only a significantly lower offer from the team, the player will simply not sign it. In particular if it is a multi-year deal, which is often was teams are trying to avoid with the QO.

The same way an agent can't insist on a player making more than they are worth, we also don't stand for a GM insisting a player takes considerably less than they are worth.

Again, do you have an example of some instances in the past this would help avoid?

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

So what deadline do you suggest? The last day to submit QO is June 30th, 2010 so the deadline should be after June 30th, 2010.

id suggest it would work as follows:

QO due by June 15
QO accepted or rejected by June 30
Player enters FA without the benefit to fall back on a QO or he forgoes Free Agency for the QO he was offered.

 

[Lord Stanley]

I think if I player does not accept the QO then it should be void. So there is risk for the player. If he doesn't receive any offers in FA then he remains a RFA on the teams prospect list until the following offseason when he can receive offers from RFA again unless the team and the player can come to another agreement during the season. If they come to an agreement during the season the contract should then start the following season same as when we sign other players on the prospect list. This put ssome degree of risk for the player as he risks potentially having to sit out the entire year making no money. If that isn't acceptable maybe a deadline of August 1st would be reasonable. So if a player doesn't accept the QO by then and still receives no offers then he goes to prospect list.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

.... the player will simply not sign it. In particular if it is a multi-year deal,

well hang on ... if these were living breathing people and the only option they had to play pro hockey was less then the QO they rejected (based on advice from their agent), you mean to tell me they would simply not play hockey?

of course not, so this simply adds to the gamesmanship of the league. if i offer a QO and the player does not accept it, i have options as GM to negotiate with the player and the player has to make a decision instead of having a fall back position that he would not have in the NHL.

 

[Lord Stanley]

well hang on ... if these were living breathing people and the only option they had to play pro hockey was less then the QO they rejected (based on advice from their agent), you mean to tell me they would simply not play hockey?

No he would probably fire his agent

 

[Lord Stanley]

I think if I player does not accept the QO then it should be void. So there is risk for the player. If he doesn't receive any offers in FA then he remains a RFA on the teams prospect list until the following offseason when he can receive offers from RFA again unless the team and the player can come to another agreement during the season. If they come to an agreement during the season the contract should then start the following season same as when we sign other players on the prospect list. This put ssome degree of risk for the player as he risks potentially having to sit out the entire year making no money. If that isn't acceptable maybe a deadline of August 1st would be reasonable. So if a player doesn't accept the QO by then and still receives no offers then he goes to prospect list.

Another option maybe is, that if a player declines the Qo and doesn't receive a offer during FA that he likes, they can go to salary arbitration. Say as an example date is August 31st. Then the Agent and the team each submit a 1 year offer and the arbitrator picks the agents number or the players number. I'm sure we could find a couple guys willing to be arbitrators. Both team and Agent would have a week to submit numbers and then another week for the arbitrators to make decisions. If one party does not submit a number the other party automatically wins the case. If neither party submits and offer the player goes on the teams prospect list until a deal can be worked out for the following year or they are RFA again the following year.

 

[Wildman]

No he would probably fire his agent

Or send them over to Russia to join Radulov and Jagr

 

[Wildman]

No he would probably fire his agent

Maybe you are right, it is thank less job where we are sacrificing our family time for the better of the game.

 

[Lord Stanley]

Or send them over to Russia to join Radulov and Jagr

Other then other European players the only player that I can recall that did that was Ray Emery and that was because nobody wanted him at the time not even his own team the Senators.

 

[Wildman]

Other then other European players the only player that I can recall that did that was Ray Emery and that was because nobody wanted him at the time not even his own team the Senators.

Wasn't there a Detroit player last season who didn't like what he was offered in arbitration and decided to move to Russia.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

well hang on ... if these were living breathing people and the only option they had to play pro hockey was less then the QO they rejected (based on advice from their agent), you mean to tell me they would simply not play hockey?

of course not, so this simply adds to the gamesmanship of the league. if i offer a QO and the player does not accept it, i have options as GM to negotiate with the player and the player has to make a decision instead of having a fall back position that he would not have in the NHL.

Well hang on...if this were a living breathing and real GM worth his salt, he wouldn't risk alienating his players and his team mates by (1), not offering something close to market value and then (2) just going with a QO, (3) then following that up by offering less than the QO,, which was too low in the first place and now (4) threatening the player that he can just sit at home unless he takes less than he is worth?

And I'm sure the GM wouldn't have any pressure to increase his offer, because the media would be calling him an idiot, Don Cherry would be calling him a cheap moron, the fans are buying less tickets, his current players are shaking their heads (thinking, they're next) and his owner might fire his ass any day because he seems to have his head up it.

More importantly and more seriously, this rule doesn't serve any real purpose. At the end of free agency, we simply don't have a ton of unsigned players. Heck, no one in this thread has been able to name one. And if there is, it's not like the QO becomes the be all and end all. The team is typically going back to the player with a long-term deal that is lower than the player would have previously accepted, but now they consider it more seriously. The QO just offers a middle ground if you're still stuck - a form of arbitration if you will. Still, I can't think of too many players that went this route.

 

[Dryden]

This is fun. But I think Matt K and I need to hijack the thread a little. Getting too heated in here.

 

[Lord Stanley]

Well hang on...if this were a living breathing and real GM worth his salt, he wouldn't risk alienating his players and his team mates by (1), not offering something close to market value and then (2) just going with a QO, (3) then following that up by offering less than the QO,, which was too low in the first place and now (4) threatening the player that he can just sit at home unless he takes less than he is worth?

If it gets to the point that the GM can offer less then the QO it would have meant likely that nobody offered more than the QO or even matched it. Which means that offering less then the QO would not be less the market value. The QO would in fact be more then market value. GM's worth there salt always offer a QO to players they want to keep, why? Because if they don't they lose the right to match an offer sheet and also then there is no arbitration. So yes this does happen and no I have never heard Don Cherry call a gm a cheap moron for not offering his players more money, or the fans or the media for that matter. I think all I ever really hear is that the GM is a moron for overpaying the player.

 

[Canuck09]

This just doesn't come up enough (apparently never as there has been no examples given) for it to be worth the yearly debate. If we end up with a few players a team that fall under this situation it might be worth arguing over.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

This just doesn't come up enough (apparently never as there has been no examples given) for it to be worth the yearly debate. If we end up with a few players a team that fall under this situation it might be worth arguing over.

It doesn't happen because GM's never had this option.

 

[Ohio Jones]

It comes down simply to this: a player in the NHL is entitled by the Collective Bargaining Agreement to a minimum raise of 100% or 110% of their current salary by a team wishing to retain their rights (prior to the player reaching UFA age, that is). If that price is higher - for whatever reason - then the perceived market value for that player, it makes no difference: they are still entitled to that amount.

So players in the HFNHL who are getting paid X are entitled by contract to X or X+10%. Minimum. If their base salary is too high for a GM's comfort, let that GM can them walk and see if he can negotiate a more reasonable salary when they're UFAs on the market.

If the GM is prepared to offer a QO to retain the player's rights, then he should be prepared to pay that amount, even if the player decides to test free agency first. The leverage for the GM comes in the event that a player does not receive another offer, in which case that player has less of a case for demanding more than the QO. But there is no way in teh NHL for a team to retain a player's NHL rights without agreeing to pay at minimum the QO amount. The team's offer has a time within which the player must respond, but after that point if the team withdraws the offer it also releases the player's rights.

So, in short, there is no mechanism short of full release and a competitive free agency bidding process by which a team can sign a player to a contract worth less than their current contract. Period.

 

[Wildman]

One of the better example is Rostislav Olesz where the agent was asking a lot more than what Colorado was offering. After free agency was over, Colorado were in better bargaining position and ended up signing him for $2.5M for 4 years.

I also believe there would be a lot more GM willing to offer more than Qualifying Offers if there was no public backlash on GM offering these offers. We saw this happened last season to Dion where most of the GM were upset about him sweeping some low end players.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

I also believe there would be a lot more GM willing to offer more than Qualifying Offers if there was no public backlash on GM offering these offers. We saw this happened last season to Dion where most of the GM were upset about him sweeping some low end players.

Yeah, although the backlash has never been a big deal. The RFA and offer sheet market has always been one that has some offers each year. I've picked one up that route, and had no less than a half dozen players sign offer sheets as well. I think it works pretty well, even though I've been the hunted, more than the hunter.

In Dion's case, it was simply the blanket offer sheets he fired out to so many guys that irked GM's, but it was a still a relatively smart move. Anyone asleep at the switch, and he would have landed a free (but relatively overpriced) asset.

All in all, what remaining RFA's there are, most float through the free agency period without a nibble, and the agents quickly try and get a deal done following that period. I actually think this is one aspect of FA that works pretty well year in, year out.