Blackhawks terminating Perry contract for cause

[LadyStanley]

Click to read more...

 

[barriers]

On the business side of things, getting half his salary as a signing bonus turned out to be a prudent move for Perry's bank account

 

[Garbageyuk]

Any word yet as to wtf he did?

 

[LadyStanley]

It's not this (debunking rumor).

 

[GindyDraws]

You know the thread over on Talk got nuked from orbit. Can't see this lasting long.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

You know the thread over on Talk got nuked from orbit. Can't see this lasting long.

Primarily because people were speculating or asking for same. Take the hint, folks.

 

[ShootIt]

Now, can Perry fight the termination, hypothetically?

Maybe he doesn't and wants to be a free agent but what would happen if the player didn't want his contract terminated?

 

[Bjindaho]

Now, can Perry fight the termination, hypothetically?

Maybe he doesn't and wants to be a free agent but what would happen if the player didn't want his contract terminated?

It depends on what caused the termination.

If Corey Perry did something wrong (something in what Perry has committed a fault of some kind and the reputation of the Blackhawks, its players and/or the NHL could be harmed) then his fight is virtually impossible. If Perry did something that is embarrassing, then he could have an argument.

 

[mouser]

Now, can Perry fight the termination, hypothetically?

Maybe he doesn't and wants to be a free agent but what would happen if the player didn't want his contract terminated?

Yes, Perry and the PA can grieve the termination. Without knowing what happened it's impossible to guess what their odds of success might be.

Very unusual to have a termination for cause where at least some element of the cause hasn't been publicly reported.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Primarily because people were speculating or asking for same. Take the hint, folks.

here is my question and it is a serious one. The hawks for the past few years have talked about being more transparent but they have done a basic copy and paste press release. Of all organizations in the NHL, the Hawks to me are on the shortest leash when it comes to being less than forthcoming in why and what they do.

Personally, I have a problem with the hawks doing this copy and poste statement without actually explain what has happened. We do not know what Perry did and with hawks not giving any idea of what he did--they are allowing speculation about the player to happen and damage done to a guy who many believe will get in the hall of fame

 

[ponder719]

There are too many things we don't know, including what we don't know. It's possible that the statement was vague because they're not sure how much they can safely divulge publicly without it leading to a grievance.

 

[Bjindaho]

here is my question and it is a serious one. The hawks for the past few years have talked about being more transparent but they have done a basic copy and paste press release. Of all organizations in the NHL, the Hawks to me are on the shortest leash when it comes to being less than forthcoming in why and what they do.

Personally, I have a problem with the hawks doing this copy and poste statement without actually explain what has happened. We do not know what Perry did and with hawks not giving any idea of what he did--they are allowing speculation about the player to happen and damage done to a guy who many believe will get in the hall of fame

Transparency isn't really telling everyone everything right away.

Transparency is having a problem, allowing independent review, then communicating what is needed about the independent review.

That being said, given that Perry is a public figure, there is a certain level of onus on Chicago to protect the public (if there is a chance that what happened could happen again)

 

[Bear of Bad News]

here is my question and it is a serious one. The hawks for the past few years have talked about being more transparent but they have done a basic copy and paste press release. Of all organizations in the NHL, the Hawks to me are on the shortest leash when it comes to being less than forthcoming in why and what they do.

Personally, I have a problem with the hawks doing this copy and poste statement without actually explain what has happened. We do not know what Perry did and with hawks not giving any idea of what he did--they are allowing speculation about the player to happen and damage done to a guy who many believe will get in the hall of fame

If it's an ongoing legal matter, they may have been advised specifically to not comment.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Transparency isn't really telling everyone everything right away.

Transparency is having a problem, allowing independent review, then communicating what is needed about the independent review.

That being said, given that Perry is a public figure, there is a certain level of onus on Chicago to protect the public (if there is a chance that what happened could happen again)

So publicly humiliating a guy and allowing the internet speculate WILDLY is allowed

 

[ponder719]

So publicly humiliating a guy and allowing the internet speculate WILDLY is allowed

Speaking in the hypothetical where I was employed by Chicago, yes, that's exactly what I'd do, because I'm not legally liable for the internet speculating. I am legally liable for what I say on behalf of myself or my organization.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

There are too many things we don't know, including what we don't know. It's possible that the statement was vague because they're not sure how much they can safely divulge publicly without it leading to a grievance.

They have to find a way because this is making it outside the hockey world. I have friends asking about it who don't know hockey at all.

They are really harming Bedard the longer they wait to make a statement to clarify things a bit.

 

[Bjindaho]

So publicly humiliating a guy and allowing the internet speculate WILDLY is allowed

The Blackhawks did not do this.

First and foremost, they cannot compromise the investigation. Second, they cannot do anything that could compromise the identity (or shame) anyone else that may have been involved.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Speaking in the hypothetical where I was employed by Chicago, yes, that's exactly what I'd do, because I'm not legally liable for the internet speculating. I am legally liable for what I say on behalf of myself or my organization.

A good lawyer would figure out a way to do both things. You're making it seem way more difficult than it is for the team to quash extremely harmful rumors.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Speaking in the hypothetical where I was employed by Chicago, yes, that's exactly what I'd do, because I'm not legally liable for the internet speculating. I am legally liable for what I say on behalf of myself or my organization.

But the hawks have put them in a bad position due to what they did last time. Hawks dug themselves a hole, lied about it and have no right to say "he screwed up so he is gone"--they need to explain their actions

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

The Blackhawks did not do this.

First and foremost, they cannot compromise the investigation. Second, they cannot do anything that could compromise the identity (or shame) anyone else that may have been involved.

They can do a lot of other things that are perfectly legal and perfectly within their rights if they wanted to. I'd be so pissed off right now if I was Bedard.

 

[Bjindaho]

They can do a lot of other things that are perfectly legal and perfectly within their rights if they wanted to. I'd be so pissed off right now if I was Bedard.

I'm sure the Bedards are thicker skinned than a lot of people here think.

Also, the organization that was accused of not investigating serious allegations is not going to do anything to compromise a 3rd party investigation into this.

 

[Yukon Joe]

So the Blackhawks have very pointedly NOT disclosed the reason for the contract termination.

Perry 100% has the right to challenge the termination. If he does however the reason for the termination will almost certainly come out - the matter would need to go to arbitration.

If Perry though doesn't dispute the contract termination (if I recall correctly Evander Kane didn't dispute his contract termination) then the reason may not come out.

I do really hope that assuming "the rumour" isn't true that the Hawks, or Perry's agent, or someone, comes out to issue a complete denial, just so it can stop circulating.

 

[JaegerDice]

So the Blackhawks have very pointedly NOT disclosed the reason for the contract termination.

Perry 100% has the right to challenge the termination. If he does however the reason for the termination will almost certainly come out - the matter would need to go to arbitration.

If Perry though doesn't dispute the contract termination (if I recall correctly Evander Kane didn't dispute his contract termination) then the reason may not come out.

I do really hope that assuming "the rumour" isn't true that the Hawks, or Perry's agent, or someone, comes out to issue a complete denial, just so it can stop circulating.

The Blackhawks terminated the contract for ‘unacceptable conduct’ under the Standard Player Contract. The idiotic ‘rumor’ would not fall under any of the terms of the standard player contract.

If people want to guess, they should find a blank standard player contract (you could probably just ask for one from any agents office), and start crossing off what seems unlikely until they narrow it down.

 

[LadyStanley]

There are also team rules (think Lamoriello no facial hair) that are also explained when joining organization. What I know of them, it's usually dress code for games, travel, etc.

 

[ItWasJustified]

There are also team rules (think Lamoriello no facial hair) that are also explained when joining organization. What I know of them, it's usually dress code for games, travel, etc.

I doubt that teams are allowed to terminate contracts if a player turns up unshaven for a game.