News: Adam Fox staying at Harvard for senior year

[bigdog16]

Vesey had already turned down NSH offering max ELC with first year immediately burned upon signing. It's obvious he had a list of favorites that could sign him, and in those speculations it was felt that BUF was too far away from the Atlantic Ocean. I think BOS was thought a front-runner.

Well yeah, every team in the league would have offered a ma ELC. Boston was the front runner if I remember correctly.

 

[GoldiFox]

Can someone clarify..... is he planning to finish harvard regardless?

Or is he willing to sign now if he can play next season?

Adam Fox has not officially said that he is going back to Harvard next year. He has said repeatedly this year that he wants to play in the NHL next year. It appears he just does not want to do that in Carolina and has asked for a trade. Carolina's owner (who makes the decisions) said “We’ll try to trade him, I think we’ll do OK. We’ll see.” this week.

I would assume any team Fox is traded to signs him immediately with the team agreeing that Fox will play in the NHL next year.

 

[Chan790]

Nobody knew where Vesey was going. Buffalo had just as good of a shot as the Rangers at that point. It wasn't a longshot at all.



I don't think he is dead set on the Rangers either. I think its just assumed because it seems like every top end college free agent ends up there. Wouldn't shock me to see Boston or NYI involved either. But as a Rangers fan I would be rattled if they gave up anything more than a 3rd for him

At anything less than a 2nd, we keep him until UFA, I think.

Get a list of where he'll sign, negotiate a trade based off a signed Fox, give team a negotiation window (get pen to paper), send trade to NHL offices, then receiving team sends signed deal.

But...opening bid is probably a 2nd; I doubt we're listening on a 3rd.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Well, no sign and trade now.

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

Well, no sign and trade now.

Wouldn’t trade-and-sign make more sense anyway?

 

[GoldiFox]

Wouldn’t trade-and-sign make more sense anyway?

Fox would have wanted whichever team to sign him for this year (2018-19) which would burn off one of his ELC years. This is not possible now for any team except Carolina according to the NHL. A trade-and-sign would be the beginning of a 3 year ELC.

 

[Menzinger]

I don't need you to explain what the current CBA rules are. This is not the conversation going on. Just because certain rules or loopholes are in place now, it don't mean they can't be changed in the next CBA.

Are you against change or something? Do you support prospects having the option to burn the team that drafts them and become free agents? I don't

That prospect is giving up thousands of dollars in earnings to get to that period to become a free agent.

Sounds fair to me

 

[4thline]

That prospect is giving up thousands of dollars in earnings to get to that period to become a free agent.

Sounds fair to me

Understatement, for a quality guy it's easily in the millions. It's not just the direct earnings forgone, but also delaying the 2nd contract

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

Fox would have wanted whichever team to sign him for this year (2018-19) which would burn off one of his ELC years. This is not possible now for any team except Carolina according to the NHL. A trade-and-sign would be the beginning of a 3 year ELC.

I mean trading his rights now for the other team to sign right away and burn an ELC year.

 

[Tawnos]

I mean trading his rights now for the other team to sign right away and burn an ELC year.

Can't because he's on the Canes reserve list. He can only sign with Carolina.

 

[PhoenyX]

Snake

 

[Menzinger]

Understatement, for a quality guy it's easily in the millions. It's not just the direct earnings forgone, but also delaying the 2nd contract

Excellent point

 

[steveat]

I've seen this happen before..then they turn out to be poo poo in the NHL

 

[NotOpie]

Please tell what an unsigned drafted player actually does to "accept the system".

Late in the response, but he accepts the rules of the CBA and the rules of the NHL....if he wants to play, he has to abide....just like the "dude".

Of course it does. That's why leagues have restricted and unrestricted free agency. When a signing comes with compensation it is, by it's very definition "restricted'.

A draft pick is an asset. A drafted player is an asset. A max ELC contract is compensation. That contract is the same no matter where you play. If a player wants to play in the league, then they adhere to whatever rules the league has for draftees. As I've said before, I firmly support Fox's right to go to free agency just as much as I support the idea that if a team offers a draftee a max contract per the CBA and that player doesn't accept that offer for whatever reason, then they can try and get another team to offer them a max ELC contract. However, that other team should compensate the drafting team for the loss of the original asset (in this case a 3rd round pick). If the player is worth it then the contracting team should pay.

What do you propose the owners give up tot he players in the next CBA negotiation to make that slight tweak?

Whatever crumb it would take....something around a less restrictive escrow structure, Olympics, etc....there are going to be lots of issues when this CBA comes up for renegotiation, but none seem as sticky as the last two negotiations.

This thread is cringe worthy

Clearly it's time for another Storm Surge.

 

[Dr Quincy]

At anything less than a 2nd, we keep him until UFA, I think.

Get a list of where he'll sign, negotiate a trade based off a signed Fox, give team a negotiation window (get pen to paper), send trade to NHL offices, then receiving team sends signed deal.

But...opening bid is probably a 2nd; I doubt we're listening on a 3rd.

So let's say it's next trade deadline or next draft day. You'd honestly keep him instead of trading him for a 3rd (the return BUF gave for Vesey)?

Why?

 

[NotOpie]

So let's say it's next trade deadline or next draft day. You'd honestly keep him instead of trading him for a 3rd (the return BUF gave for Vesey)?

Why?

You get whatever you can for him and it's foolish to think otherwise.

 

[Starat327]

Late in the response, but he accepts the rules of the CBA and the rules of the NHL....if he wants to play, he has to abide....just like the "dude".



A draft pick is an asset. A drafted player is an asset. A max ELC contract is compensation. That contract is the same no matter where you play. If a player wants to play in the league, then they adhere to whatever rules the league has for draftees. As I've said before, I firmly support Fox's right to go to free agency just as much as I support the idea that if a team offers a draftee a max contract per the CBA and that player doesn't accept that offer for whatever reason, then they can try and get another team to offer them a max ELC contract. However, that other team should compensate the drafting team for the loss of the original asset (in this case a 3rd round pick). If the player is worth it then the contracting team should pay.



Whatever crumb it would take....something around a less restrictive escrow structure, Olympics, etc....there are going to be lots of issues when this CBA comes up for renegotiation, but none seem as sticky as the last two negotiations.



Clearly it's time for another Storm Surge.

Give me a storm surge over people complaining about prospects following rules of the collectively bargained union agreement.

 

[Chan790]

So let's say it's next trade deadline or next draft day. You'd honestly keep him instead of trading him for a 3rd (the return BUF gave for Vesey)?

Why?

Because selling him below value to a division rival isn't in our interests.

Sure he may sign there in a year and we get nothing...but that's a year he's going to have to spend in a non-prime college hockey conference, which is not doing anything for his development, and pretty sure we're done spending time and resources on his development. No more development camps for him. Maybe he never reaches his peak potential as a result of his stagnant year...keeping that "peaked" asset away from a rival has benefits.

 

[Alluckks]

So let's say it's next trade deadline or next draft day. You'd honestly keep him instead of trading him for a 3rd (the return BUF gave for Vesey)?

Why?

Because he is a petty bitter fan on the internet

 

[Starat327]

Because he is a petty bitter fan on the internet

Or, it could be because Carolina recently used a 2nd round pick on Fox's current Harvard teammate, Jack Drury. Allowing Fox to leave for what amounts to nothing or a minimal asset sets a dangerous precedent of "if I put them in a hard spot, they'll cave and I get what I want" that I'm sure the Canes don't want to be in.

By making Fox wait a year, they aren't "getting nothing", they're getting potential future negotiating leverage, and while it's hard/impossible to quantify that in terms of a draft pick, if the Canes can't get back something useful, they may be better served with the credibility and future leverage over a nominal asset.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Or, it could be because Carolina recently used a 2nd round pick on Fox's current Harvard teammate, Jack Drury. Allowing Fox to leave for what amounts to nothing or a minimal asset sets a dangerous precedent of "if I put them in a hard spot, they'll cave and I get what I want" that I'm sure the Canes don't want to be in.

By making Fox wait a year, they aren't "getting nothing", they're getting potential future negotiating leverage, and while it's hard/impossible to quantify that in terms of a draft pick, if the Canes can't get back something useful, they may be better served with the credibility and future leverage over a nominal asset.

The Canes will always be a small market team, they are always going to have these problems whether or not they decide to trade Fox's rights or let him go UFA. Not sure Jack Drury isnt looking at this situation like hey I better sign with them or I'll have to spend another year in college. Further, they also play different positions and have different reasons for signing/not signing. This isn't a vacuum. In fact, you could make the absolute argument for the opposite, wherein he see's the treatment of Fox by the team not trading him away and then says "I'll just do the same."

 

[spockBokk]

Perhaps this will be going off on an unproductive tangent on Drury, but...

All reports on Jack Drury seem to have the same sentiment that he is a very solid character/heart and soul guy. The Canes draft “insider” article in the Athletic had their scouts refer to him as future captain material. Now who’s to say if he’ll even have an NHL future, but I’d imagine the concern for him pulling a “Vesey/Fox” on CAR is pretty low. I’m sure he’s paying attention to how the whole Fox situation will play out, but I don’t think it will have a lasting effect on whether or not he signs with CAR after his sophomore or junior season.

Fox, on the other hand, has spurned 2 NHL organizations wanting to get him under contract. While it may be a reach to call Fox selfish or entitled based on that info, I think it would be valid to call into question whether or not he’d be the best guy to have around in the locker room since he seems adamant on having an NHL spot handed to him...

 

[TGWL]

Late in the response, but he accepts the rules of the CBA and the rules of the NHL....if he wants to play, he has to abide....just like the "dude".



A draft pick is an asset. A drafted player is an asset. A max ELC contract is compensation. That contract is the same no matter where you play. If a player wants to play in the league, then they adhere to whatever rules the league has for draftees. As I've said before, I firmly support Fox's right to go to free agency just as much as I support the idea that if a team offers a draftee a max contract per the CBA and that player doesn't accept that offer for whatever reason, then they can try and get another team to offer them a max ELC contract. However, that other team should compensate the drafting team for the loss of the original asset (in this case a 3rd round pick). If the player is worth it then the contracting team should pay.



Whatever crumb it would take....something around a less restrictive escrow structure, Olympics, etc....there are going to be lots of issues when this CBA comes up for renegotiation, but none seem as sticky as the last two negotiations.



Clearly it's time for another Storm Surge.

What if that player was traded, such as this case? Should Canes be compensated a 3rd when they didn't even draft him?

 

[TGWL]

Because selling him below value to a division rival isn't in our interests.

Sure he may sign there in a year and we get nothing...but that's a year he's going to have to spend in a non-prime college hockey conference, which is not doing anything for his development, and pretty sure we're done spending time and resources on his development. No more development camps for him. Maybe he never reaches his peak potential as a result of his stagnant year...keeping that "peaked" asset away from a rival has benefits.

So purposely trying to ruin a players career so another team doesn't get better? I get why fans would be upset, but I think you gotta' get past that and take what you can. That doesn't mean settle for garbage, but a 2nd/3rd isn't what I would call garbage. Never go in losing an asset for nothing, unless it's make or break playoffs.

 

[Albatros]

Fox, on the other hand, has spurned 2 NHL organizations wanting to get him under contract. While it may be a reach to call Fox selfish or entitled based on that info, I think it would be valid to call into question whether or not he’d be the best guy to have around in the locker room since he seems adamant on having an NHL spot handed to him...

Why would he quit Harvard to play in the AHL? Not doing that is more of a positive than a negative trait.