Chip Alexander: Scott Darling Granted Personal Leave of Absence

[Anton Babchuk]

I know that coming around every few months and talking down to people is your thing but honestly you can lose the attitude. I never said he walked away from the team or was in breach of his contract.

I completely understand he asked for a leave but what is the team supposed to do? Deny his request and force him to stay? They basically have to let him go as it’s what he needs to do for his own health and well-being.

The bottom line is he isn’t able to fulfill his end of the contract.

Darling was getting shelled in the AHL and taking away ice time from our prospects. It's entirely possible that they were more than willing to grant his request to take extended leave of absence. This is the point that's being overlooked here...he was costing the Checkers games and forcing actual prospects to play in the ECHL.

Again, who says that he "isn't able" to fulfill his end of the contract? Perhaps he's perfectly capable of playing, but they've just agreed mutually agreed for him to stay away. He doesn't have to ride buses in the AHL, they don't have him costing them games and taking away ice time from prospects. Works out for both sides.
​

 

[Anton Babchuk]

We likely are not allowed to have Darling on the leave indefinitely. Him not being allowed to be sent to ECHL without his own approval, his return to CLT may well be the only possible allowed option at this point.

The Lightning let Dave Andreychuk take a leave of absence for the remainder of the year after they waived him on January 10th in 2006. If that was perfectly fine with the NHL I don't see why this would be a problem, presuming that it is mutually agreed upon.

 

[Lempo]

The Lightning let Dave Andreychuk take a leave of absence for the remainder of the year after they waived him on January 10th in 2006. If that was perfectly fine with the NHL I don't see why this would be a problem, presuming that it is mutually agreed upon.

That happened 7 years before the current CBA and right after the introduction of the salary cap. It is very likely that the rules on the leaves of absence have changed since to prevent them being used to get rid of unwanted players (and their cap hit).

 

[Chrispy]

That happened 7 years before the current CBA and right after the introduction of the salary cap. It is very likely that the rules on the leaves of absence have changed since to prevent them being used to get rid of unwanted players (and their cap hit).

Is Darling not on the Hurricanes cap for $3.125M or so while he's buried?
Is Darling not being paid during his leave of absence?

If Darling is still taking up the appropriate cap space and still being paid, why would the NHL object to the Canes granting him a leave of absence?
If they try to put him on long-term IR or put him on an unpaid leave of absence, I could see the NHL or the union objecting. But I haven't seen any indication either of those are the case.

 

[Anton Babchuk]

That happened 7 years before the current CBA and right after the introduction of the salary cap. It is very likely that the rules on the leaves of absence have changed since to prevent them being used to get rid of unwanted players (and their cap hit).

??? Darling has the same cap hit regardless of whether he's on a leave of absence or not.

Also unless you can actually cite this "very likely" rule change, we shouldn't assume that it actually happened.

 

[Lempo]

??? Darling has the same cap hit regardless of whether he's on a leave of absence or not.

Also unless you can actually cite this "very likely" rule change, we shouldn't assume that it actually happened.

I would cite if I could find anything. The leaves of absence may be covered in the non-public NHL by-laws, because the CBA got nothing on them.

Googling the phrase "NHL leave of absence" gives news of various cases. The reporters in the know often report that a player "requested" and "was granted an indefinite leave of absence" after by either the team or Bettman (suspected crime cases). So, what we know, leave can be "indefinite", are "requested" and are "granted". These phrasings suggest there is a protocol. Maybe the NHL (commissioner) has to approve them if granted by a team. Sometimes the player seems to have been put through waivers before granting him a (non-family emergency) indefinite leave of absence.

In the Rick Tocchet case (sports betting) Bettman slapped all kinds of conditions to his leave of absence, so it seems likely there are ad hoc conditions put on the leave of absence when a player requests one for an acceptable ad hoc reason:

Tocchet met with Bettman and requested the leave, which the commissioner agreed to as long as several conditions were met by the former All-Star player.

Tocchet, who works under Coyotes head coach Wayne Gretzky, must immediately cease all contact and communication with all NHL and team personnel and stay away for the duration of his leave. He will not be allowed to return without Bettman's consent.

The commissioner also reserves the right to change the terms of Tocchet's absence at any time.

- klip -

On the advice of attorney Kevin Marino, Tocchet wasn't prepared to respond to specific questions about the allegations, the NHL said in a news release. It was at the end of the meeting that Tocchet requested the leave of absence.

NHL grants Tocchet indefinite leave of absence

(I don't know, looks to me like Tocchet was given the option to request a leave of absence so they can circumvent around an uncomfortable suspension in a presumed-innocent-until-proven-guilty situation.)

After the introduction of the salary cap there has been all kinds of tweaks to the various rules every time someone has found a loophope and usurped it. NHL do have their rosters rules and the waivers rules and all the she-bang to try ensure the parity. You could use a "leave of absence" to effectively sideline a waivers-proof bad player from the roster and then emergency call-up a tweener to circumvent a situation where you would have to put the tweener on waivers at some point and lose him. I'm sure NHL has addressed that possibility.

I can find absolutely nothing on the possible cap implications of a leave of absence. It's probably a full cap hit, as the CBA 50 about the cap rules has nothing on leaves of absence.

 

[Chrispy]

I think the NHL would examine a leave of absence from an NHL team more closely than this one. As @Lempo points out there are potential circumvention issues with an NHL leave of absence.

None of those exist here. Darling was placed on waivers. Darling cleared waivers and was sent to the AHL. Darling reported and played in the AHL.

The NHL roster spot is open either way. Is the NHL going to launch an investigation into a mutual leave of absence over an AHL roster spot??

 

[OTC]

I think the NHL would examine a leave of absence from an NHL team more closely than this one. As @Lempo points out there are potential circumvention issues with an NHL leave of absence.

None of those exist here. Darling was placed on waivers. Darling cleared waivers and was sent to the AHL. Darling reported and played in the AHL.

The NHL roster spot is open either way. Is the NHL going to launch an investigation into a mutual leave of absence over an AHL roster spot??

Darling may have some medical/mental health issues. Due to HIPPA regulations/law the Club or the NHL will not openly discuss this matter. He may eventually have to walk away from the game. If he gets better maybe he goes back to Chicago for a change of scenery, unfortunately he goes to Rockford as Crawford is back.

 

[Lempo]

Darling may have some medical/mental health issues. Due to HIPPA regulations/law the Club or the NHL will not openly discuss this matter. He may eventually have to walk away from the game. If he gets better maybe he goes back to Chicago for a change of scenery, unfortunately he goes to Rockford as Crawford is back.

Technically the situation would be handled by the SPC paragraph 5 in that case and he would get his sick leave from the team physician. Though, he wouldn't get paid if the "injury" isn't caused by hockey/employment related reason so it's (probably) the same difference.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I think the NHL would examine a leave of absence from an NHL team more closely than this one. As @Lempo points out there are potential circumvention issues with an NHL leave of absence.

None of those exist here. Darling was placed on waivers. Darling cleared waivers and was sent to the AHL. Darling reported and played in the AHL.

The NHL roster spot is open either way. Is the NHL going to launch an investigation into a mutual leave of absence over an AHL roster spot??

Well said. This is a nothing argument for precisely this reason.

Some people are speculating that because Darling isn't playing, maybe the team should be able to take their money back!

Unless and until we hear some *serious* crazy shit to the contrary, that can't, and won't, happen. It's not even worth further speculation.

That probably won't stop further speculation, of course. But it'll put an end to me paying attention to it.

 

[GoldiFox]

If I had my guess the team has already decided to buy out Darling this offseason and there was no real reason to keep him around. Maybe it was worth trying to see if he could be a good AHL tender in the beginning, but that didn't work out either. I doubt Scott Darling wants to bus around the AHL to sit on the bench and the team would probably prefer to keep his on-ice struggles away from their success. Nedeljkovic is 30-7-1 this year in the AHL while Darling finished 5-6-0. Canes fans know how players start acting when Darling is in net, it drags the entire team down.

It's a Big Head at Hooli situation, send him up to the roof and keep him from harming anything.