Hans Landaskog
Registered User
Why would the Avs feel the need to let everyone else know the CBA rules.
If a team was dumb enough to offer sheet O'Reilly despite him having to go through waivers let them deal with it. Besides we matched anyhow..Rumor: In-season Proposals, Rumors, Free Agents & Roster Moves (related topics) LI
- Thread starter Frenchy
- Start date
- Status
Why would the Avs feel the need to let everyone else know the CBA rules.
If a team was dumb enough to offer sheet O'Reilly despite him having to go through waivers let them deal with it. Besides we matched anyhow..
bohlmeister
...................
- May 18, 2007
- 17,854
- 456
Why would the Avs feel the need to let everyone else know the CBA rules.
Negotiating power, and they wouldn't have been stuck with the ridiculous offer sheet.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
Why would the Avs feel the need to let everyone else know the CBA rules.
Oh how I wish we were in last place when that offer sheet happened and Sherman knew the waiver rule.
Avs don't accept offer sheet. Take first and 3rd.
Claim O'Reilly off waivers.
Trade 6th overall + 2 3rd rounders and Elliott to move up from 6th to 4th in draft.
Draft Seth Jones 4th overall.
Roy and Sakic walks out of the draft day with the 2 best players from the draft while Sherman get's absolutely no credit
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,384
- 31,627
Why would the Avs feel the need to let everyone else know the CBA rules.
Am I the only one that remembers this from last year haha? It was all discussed at great length.
If the Avs would have just leaked it to the press, or mentioned it in an interview that he'd have to pass through waivers, they wouldn't be on the hook for a $6.5M QO right now. Not that I'm too worried, but it's clear they didn't know this CBA detail. At least a couple other GM's on other teams did know this detail, and it didn't even apply to them.
It's not about how the O'Reilly situation turned out, it's about their lack of knowledge on CBA details. They don't need a repeat of the PL bonus clause screwup.
zxcvnm
Registered User
Oh how I wish we were in last place when that offer sheet happened and Sherman knew the waiver rule.
Avs don't accept offer sheet. Take first and 3rd.
Claim O'Reilly off waivers.
Trade 6th overall + 2 3rd rounders and Elliott to move up from 6th to 4th in draft.
Draft Seth Jones 4th overall.
Roy and Sakic walks out of the draft day with the 2 best players from the draft while Sherman get's absolutely no credit
I actually wonder what would've happened if we didn't accept the offer sheet. Did the league ever clarify if O'Reilly would've had to go through waivers (Calgary, for their part, stated he wouldn't)? Part of me thinks the league would've granted a special exemption to this case and told the Avs to either match or lose O'Reilly to Calgary without him having to go through waivers.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 63,222
- 47,700
I don't get the sense that the Avs were ever going to let ROR go. So they were not going to risk putting him on waivers and losing him to Columbus (I think they were in last at that point). No reasonable offer from us would have gotten Columbus to skip over him or trade him to us. It was pretty much lose him to the OS compensation or sign ROR.
I also think the Calgary would have had a decent legal case to prevent ROR from going on waivers initially. At least gotten an injunction to let it play out in court.
I also think the Calgary would have had a decent legal case to prevent ROR from going on waivers initially. At least gotten an injunction to let it play out in court.
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,384
- 31,627
I don't think the league would have let it go down that way. The OS probably would have just been nullified after a drawn-out process.
It's clear though that the Avs were just as clueless about the waiver rule as Fester was.
JoeSakic13
Registered User
Yeah, and not to mention if Colorado DID try to pull off something like this, I can see the league reacting by forcing Colorado to give Calgary back it's draft picks.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 63,222
- 47,700
Calgary would have filled for an injunction to prevent ROR going on waivers at the very least. So the waivers wouldn't have happened quickly. I don't think assuming the Avs didn't know the waiver rule is the right way to look at it. They might have been fully aware and didn't care.
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,384
- 31,627
They couldn't possibly have been aware of it. They would have been screaming to everyone about it so no one gave him an OS. It killed their negotiating standpoint, why on earth would they let that happen out of choice?
If they knew about it, and didn't bring it up publicly as a deterrent to an OS because they "didn't care" that's even more negligent than not knowing about it.
zxcvnm
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2012
- 63,222
- 47,700
What could they really have gotten out of the deal? An extra pick if the NHL let them (big, big if). It could easily have been deemed not worth it to have ROR back on the ice sooner for a team that wasn't out of the playoffs at that point.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
What negotiating standpoint? There were no talks at that point in time. Feaster did the Avs a favor if you ask me. It's a little more money than we would have liked to give out but the relationship between the two groups was terrible. An offer sheet seemed to be the only thing that would give ROR an opportunity to play with Colorado last year. I don't doubt the Avs were hoping for somebody to offer one.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 63,222
- 47,700
A huge, huge favor. The season went to crap, and we got rid of Sacco. Then, I believe that the whole negotiations had a lot to do with the Lacrioxs being shown the door.
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,384
- 31,627
Do you guys really not remember that the general consensus last year was that neither team was aware of the waiver rule in the CBA? It's not just me, it was pretty much everyone when it happened last year. It was pretty obvious.
I don't care about the O'Reilly situation itself, and it's not about what they could have done after signing the OS and passing through waivers. It's about not getting the OS in the first place. It hurt the team from their standpoint. Not that I'm worried about that, but I'm worried about them not knowing these CBA details, like the waiver rule, and that Malone was likely going to be a UFA.
As for their negotiating standpoint, this is pretty obvious as well. I don't think it really needs to be spelled out, but if they're trying to stick to their guns (which they obviously were) and a team comes in with a big offer sheet that they have to match (which is obviously what happened) it kills their negotiating standpoint and they have to cave immediately. If no one gives O'Reilly an offer sheet it's better for the team.
Since the team never brought it up, they clearly didn't know about it. Even if they didn't go to the media and tell everyone about it, they should have made it well aware to everyone. Every team that asked them about a trade for O'Reilly (including Calgary) they should have said, "oh by the way just so you know, if you decide to give him an offer sheet he'll have to pass through waivers, so you might as well not do it." They should have mentioned it to his agent to give them leverage in negotiations. They should have mentioned it to O'Reilly to help him want to sign a deal, and maybe not wait for an OS, or maybe not sign it because he'd end up in Columbus.
None of these things happened. They clearly didn't know about it. It's not even a maybe really, it's that's obvious.
They need to familiarize themselves more with the CBA. We've already seen what happens when you're not aware of these details, when they were unaware of Blake and Sakic's bonus clauses kicking in and killing them cap wise coming out of the first lockout. It forced them to lose some key players, and hampered them from replacing them adequately.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 63,222
- 47,700
You are making two assumptions.... that they don't know about Group 6 UFA status, which is pretty unlikely, and that they were the ones who didn't know about the waiver rule in the CBA. There is proof of neither, and on the Group 6... I'm sure they know about it.
It may have been the consensus on here, but that doesn't mean crap to a NHL front office or the NHL. We are not the authority, I actually doubt that many of us are lawyers capable of making a case on the matter. The only team you can definitively say didn't know about it was Calgary. The rest is just an assumption of incompetence, not evidence.
Anyways, it was a blurred line not as clear cut as you are making it. There were rumors that other teams were thinking about the offer sheet route on ROR, so either they didn't know... or they thought they could fight it. Why would the Avalanche take a chance on something like that?
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,384
- 31,627
If you don't feel comfortable making an assumption on something that obvious, you might as well never make an assumption about anything.
I feel like the assumption that they did know the waiver rule and never brought it up to any other team as a deterrent, and that Roy did know Malone could be a UFA when he said they're going to see what he looks like in camp next year and then trade him if he doesn't make the team, is a way way bigger assumption than what I'm saying. To each their own though.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
So what you are you trying to say exactly? You're trying to say management didn't know something last year which is impossible to be proven. Even if they didn't know, the front office had an entire overhaul so that issue (which we don't know if it even exists) may have been fixed. You made an argument over Blake and Sakic's contracts. Again, completely different management (part of which is in fact Joe Sakic). This year we have Brad Malone who no doubt gives an effort and proves to be better than some guys and he is eligible to be a free agent and you are accusing our management of not knowing this? If our hockey team is worried about losing Brad Malone to free agency, we're in a lot of trouble. He is very replaceable and i'm sure the management staff that has turned our team from 2nd last in the league to 5th overall understands the rules of free agency.
Sure things happened in the past that make you wonder, but they have nothing to do with what happens today. We often find ourselves wondering what is going on at practices because of the lack of coverage of this team and you are going to go out and criticize the knowledge that our management staff has on the CBA? If you know enough about this that you can predict the minds of our behind the scenes staff you should consider making a career of it.
Ya, I'd still sign him if we could. A bit like we did with Hejda who was a less good Orpik basically. 3-4 years?
- Feb 24, 2012
- 63,222
- 47,700
You are setting up a scenario with it. Just like maybe they knew about the rule, but didn't feel confident in fighting it legally and it wasn't worth possibly losing ROR for. If they had used to their advantage and lost, it would have been potentially way worse. The Malone thing was said at the beginning of the season where Roy (not Sherman and Sakic) said it in a press conference. Maybe they expected him to play a lot more games during the season, or maybe they had a discussion on whether Malone would declare for it (Malone still has to file for Group 6 to become a UFA, odds are he will).
There are a ton of different ways this all could have went down. We simply don't know the inner workings and discussions. What we do know is that 2 people lost their job over the ROR situation and Group 6 UFA is a pretty common thing. If Millan and Patterson are re-signed, at the end of their next contract they could be Group 6 as well.
Hench, how reliable was the person on twitter who said that Avs and Rangers higher ups are meeting today?
- Feb 24, 2012
- 63,222
- 47,700
Actually I have no idea... he runs a blog on a Rangers that seems to have some okay info. I'm sure it was a joke that Roy is a part of the management group.
bromando
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2013
- 891
- 164
As an outsider to this discussion, I feel like you're misinterpreting...but perhaps not. Had the Avs management known about the waiver rule, they would've told the league about it ahead of time, before ROR could've even signed an offer sheet. That way, a team like Calgary wouldn't have been dumb enough to offer sheet him when he would have to go through waivers. It gives the Avs leverage in the negotiating room to say to ROR: "Look, no other team besides the team in last place can sign you to an offer sheet because you'll have to go through waivers." With that in mind, ROR has to either hope for a good offer from the team in last place or come down a bit on his asking price.
It's not about legally fighting the rule, it's about letting the other teams in the league know ahead of time so they wouldn't make the mistake. Feaster wouldn't have made that offer if he had known that ROR would pass through waivers. Perhaps the Avs knew about the rule, but it seems more likely that they didn't or they would've used it to their advantage by telling Feaster ahead of time that he would be an idiot to offer sheet ROR. The bolded part above isn't true. Had they used the rule to their advantage and told everyone ahead of time, and Feaster still made the bonehead offer sheet, they would still match it but at least they could say "we warned Feaster."
Edit: I also agree with others though that this isn't relevant to new management and that the Malone situation isn't cause for concern. I think we can sign him as a UFA if we want to. I doubt he's going to be highly sought after
Last edited:
RockLobster
King in the North
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
Gold Medal 2024 IIHF WORLD CHAMPION - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 7Staked: $36,600.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-