Discussion in 'Tampa Bay Lightning' started by DistantThunderRep, Oct 19, 2018.
I don't get it. Is being in shape no longer a requirement for being an athlete? Especially in a case where it clearly has an effect on the way you perform, and when it's not like you have a massive skillset to fall back on?
If Dotchin just got lazy over the summer and there's no health issues related to this then this is pretty ridiculous and embarrassing on his side.
"The rationale is two-fold. Now that Dotchin is signed with the Anaheim Ducks at $800,000 pro rated and he had a contract for $925,000 from the Tampa Bay Lightning, Dotchin is going to be out over the course of this season about $189,000. So first and foremost, they want to try and get that money back for him. But second and maybe broader issue, more important, the NHLPA does not want to set a precedent that teams can terminate a contract for material breach if a guy shows up to training camp vastly out of shape."
Maybe players should take their obligations to their contract a little more seriously and exercise some common sense with their decisions in the offseason. However, this kind of a thing is typical of a lot of the young generation. Act as if they're being picked on instead of being held accountable.
The PA advocates for the players. I don't think that the totality of the PA was cool with them pushing to get Austin Watson's suspension specifically reduced, but they're paying them dues to fight for them at every juncture.
It's like the ACLU.
Except there's no way Tampa is proving Dotchin's physique is negatively effecting his play from 1 day at camp, there are no clauses that state you have to be a certain weight. Doesn't look good that another club signed him just 30 days after too.
Maybe @The Macho Man can chime in but this seems like an easy win for NHLPA with how subjective this thing is, they don't want to set precedent for this. Tampa was much too reactionary but maybe they just wanted the message sent.
I think its because this was the second time he failed to come to camp in shape.
I'm thinking it's all about the precedent. If they can terminate a guy for 30 lbs, it'll happen for 25, eventually 20, 15, and onwards.
Yeah, but the other side of that precedent is just as scary for teams. Once players sign, they have no obligation to hold themselves to a pro standard.
The solution is almost always somewhere in the middle. I wouldn't be surprised if this became a point for the next CBA.
Hypothetically, what if the team has his weight from last year, and it's also high. (We can almost assume it was, given the pre-season suspension.) I'm guessing there are plenty of stats to show a drop off in play. We might not be able to link this directly to his conditioning, but we could probably make a good case for it.
Yeah. Owners are likely to want to be able to set conditions under which a contract can be terminated, and players are going to want contracts as secure as possible. Showing up out of shape (possibly multiple times) seems like a common sense breach, but I get that we can't necessarily apply that, especially when there are going to be easy double standards to point out, like Buff in Winnipeg, and Kessel when he was in Toronto, both of whom could perform well above the level of the average player, regardless of conditioning. Guys like Dotchin can't do that.
Except correlation between increased "weight" and performance isn't always negative, some players put on weight and perform better, unless BMI is also regulated - that's not an argument that'll spin well.
Like I said, there's way too much subjectivity and the way the conditioning clauses are worded from what I've read just leave things too open ended.
Right, but I'm assuming they have more than just his weight to go on. He likely under-performed on a number of physical tests the first day of camp. Weight is just the easiest, all-encompassing metric.
The CBA clause that was used for the termination is pretty broad. The bugaboo is going to be on "material breach", and I'm not sure under what state law the CBA is governed under (my guess would be either Delaware or NY).
If I were a betting man, I would guess that Dotchin wins, but there are certainly potentially valid arguments for Tampa as well. I feel like - in an odd way - this is a fight that needed to happen, and it needed to happen with a player like Jake Dotchin on a 1 year deal instead of (say) an Andrew Ladd/Milan Lucic on a 6 year deal. The stakes for Tampa are very low - worst case they carry 200k in dead cap space which we can afford. But this will set the precedence for both the teams and the players as to what the expectation is moving forward.
If at the end of the year he weighed 220 and came into camp at 250 there's not much subjectivity to that, he's well overweight. Someone like Buff or Kessel that were mentioned earlier most likely weigh similar to what they ended the previous season at and have been known to play at that weight.
Dotchin came into camp overweight knowing he wouldn't play at all. So he figured he could get a paycheck for doing nothing. Coming in 30-35 pounds overweight means his BMI would have been pretty bad (for an NHL Player), as his second offense for the same issue, termination seems like the way to go.
Why would they be penalized with having to carry a cap hit? Dotchin had an AAV of 812k, they could've just buried him in the minors and had no cap penalties. His actual salary is where the difference lies so he's probably fighting for that.
Yeah - didn't think of burying him in the minors.
Might be done anyway as a penalty (who knows), but at the end of the day it's an academic distinction since we have plenty of cap space for this season.
Yeah, both sides will probably want protection in the next CBA, but they should be able to agree on some kind of reasonable standard. I doubt we'd have terminated the contract if the case weren't extreme, so my guess is teams try to get some protection from extreme cases, like this one, while players will get protection from mild-to-moderate cases.
Also - for the record - I doubt that the only thing the Bolts looked at was his weight/BF%/BMI. I'm assuming they conducted other tests, and those may be more relevant as to whether he could play than just looking at his weight. If his Vo2 max was really bad, for instance, Tampa has a higher likelihood of prevailing.
Either way, I hope the experience is a real wake-up call for Dotch. I liked him and wish him well.
How could those tests not have come out bad? Assuming Friedman's 25% bodyfat number is accurate, I'm not seeing any way Dotchin shows up like that and performs the way he did when, also an assumption, he showed up at a reasonable number in previous years.
VASTLY out of shape.
Yeah I think this is just about establishing a standard for this, otherwise we could just use it as an excuse to cut say Callahan, to free up cap space.
Separate names with a comma.