NHL Player Safety hearing for Raffi - gets 41 games/won't appeal

[hockeyball]

I believe this works kind of IR where it simply opens up a roster spot but the missed games count.

I sure hope so, or the Sharks have pretty much just said "tough ****, have a nice life" to Raffi heh.

 

[weastern bias]

I believe this works kind of IR where it simply opens up a roster spot but the missed games count.

I sure hope so, or the Sharks have pretty much just said "tough ****, have a nice life" to Raffi heh.

Hopefully this is the case

At least we'll presumably be able to carry 23 players through the year now

 

[hockeyball]

Hopefully this is the case

At least we'll presumably be able to carry 23 players through the year now

I don't want him to ever wear teal again, and I don't really care if he ever plays again, but that seriously would suck for Raffi. He's be essentially banned from the NHL and there would be nothing he could do about it. If the NHL intended to ban him, they would have banned him.

 

[AgentCooper]

Considering this is a contract year for Raffi, he'd better be on his absolute best behaviour when he returns or he's not going to get another contract. I think he's likely done in the NHL after this season. Might try Europe I guess.

 

[bigwillie]

I don't want him to ever wear teal again, and I don't really care if he ever plays again, but that seriously would suck for Raffi. He's be essentially banned from the NHL and there would be nothing he could do about it. If the NHL intended to ban him, they would have banned him.

I think the NHL does want him out of the league, but they in no way could/would issue an outright ban. A lifetime ban would result in a long, drawn out appeal process, and would set an even bigger precedent than the 41 game suspension. It would be too much of a headache. The NHL knew that a half season suspension is pretty much a death sentence for the guy, and settled on that. Same result, with way less headache.

I wouldn't be surprised if he is back at some point though, in all honesty. Doug Wilson stuck up for him after the Stoll hit, and while he surely won't be doing the same here, I can't see him going from defending him to ending his career just like that . Just a hunch.

 

[weastern bias]

I don't want him to ever wear teal again, and I don't really care if he ever plays again, but that seriously would suck for Raffi. He's be essentially banned from the NHL and there would be nothing he could do about it. If the NHL intended to ban him, they would have banned him.

Das cool, I want him to do both

 

[Mach12]

Considering this is a contract year for Raffi, he'd better be on his absolute best behaviour when he returns or he's not going to get another contract. I think he's likely done in the NHL after this season. Might try Europe I guess.

Raffi can go play for Vityaz.

 

[hockeyball]

Das cool, I want him to do both

Which both? Never wear teal again and be banned and never play again? or you want him to wear teal again and play in the NHL again?

 

[weastern bias]

Which both? Never wear teal again and be banned and never play again? or you want him to wear teal again and play in the NHL again?

The second, much bolder part

 

[bigwillie]

The second, much bolder part

Any reason why? Do you think he will finally clean up his act? Or do you like the way he plays?

 

[SJGoalie32]

I don't want him to ever wear teal again, and I don't really care if he ever plays again, but that seriously would suck for Raffi. He's be essentially banned from the NHL and there would be nothing he could do about it. If the NHL intended to ban him, they would have banned him.

Well, nothing he could do about it NOW.

There's a lot he could have done at pretty much any one of at least a dozen points over the last 10 years to avoid this......and he chose not to.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

I believe this works kind of IR where it simply opens up a roster spot but the missed games count.

That said if that's not the way it works and he's done with the Sharks count me among the fans that are happy about it.

I believe a player has to be on an active roster for the suspension to count. It would be nice if the league could do their job and clarify.

 

[sr228]

I believe a player has to be on an active roster for the suspension to count. It would be nice if the league could do their job and clarify.

Normally, yes. A player has to be on the roster for the games to count against the suspension.

This is a unique situation though & I think the Sharks had to petition the league for this to happen.

It would actually be nice if the Sharks could clarify as it's their players & roster.

 

[weastern bias]

Any reason why? Do you think he will finally clean up his act? Or do you like the way he plays?

I don't think Raffi CAN clean up his act

He's a banger who needs to hit hard to get into his game and be effective, but now he's under constant scrutiny from every official in the game

There is no borderline for Torres anymore, his hits are either clean or subject to season-length discipline

The problem is Raffi throws like at least one borderline hit every game, and the DoPS is all like:



I want him around because I find him to be a very effective player when he gets to play his game, and because I'd like to see the Sharks stick it to those Do POSs again

Just hopefully this time with more triumph, and less sadness

 

[hockeyball]

Any reason why? Do you think he will finally clean up his act? Or do you like the way he plays?

I like the way he's injured all the time, it means he's not around to sabotage the team more!

Well, nothing he could do about it NOW.

There's a lot he could have done at pretty much any one of at least a dozen points over the last 10 years to avoid this......and he chose not to.

Yah, but my point was that might open them up to an actual legal suit because it's not really well defined in the contracts as far as I can tell. Seems like something they wouldn't even want to open the door to.

 

[CrypTic]

I think the NHL does want him out of the league, but they in no way could/would issue an outright ban. A lifetime ban would result in a long, drawn out appeal process, and would set an even bigger precedent than the 41 game suspension. It would be too much of a headache. The NHL knew that a half season suspension is pretty much a death sentence for the guy, and settled on that. Same result, with way less headache.

I wouldn't be surprised if he is back at some point though, in all honesty. Doug Wilson stuck up for him after the Stoll hit, and while he surely won't be doing the same here, I can't see him going from defending him to ending his career just like that . Just a hunch.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him play this year but I'd be surprised if the Sharks re-signed him or any team gave him a contract. He's 33, has bad knees, and is a huge suspension risk. He's done IMO no matter what DW does this year. Unless the suspension gets substantially reduced, we're only talking about a few months of play regardless of DW's actions.

I'm not sure if we're agreeing or not.

 

[CrypTic]

Normally, yes. A player has to be on the roster for the games to count against the suspension.

This is a unique situation though & I think the Sharks had to petition the league for this to happen.

It would actually be nice if the Sharks could clarify as it's their players & roster.

I'm sure they would have had to petition the NHL for non-roster status. That's clear in the CBA.

I'd like clarification too. I think the wording re: which games count for a suspension is vague enough that these games could count toward the suspension if the NHL wanted them to (and interpreted the CBA that way). My guess is that the NHL would want the NHLPA to sign off on that, though, bc it sets a fairly important precedent.

The Sharks will need to clarify at some point so maybe it will happen relatively soon.

 

[sr228]

I'd like clarification too. I think the wording re: which games count for a suspension is vague enough that these games could count toward the suspension if the NHL wanted them to (and interpreted the CBA that way). My guess is that the NHL would want the NHLPA to sign off on that, though, bc it sets a fairly important precedent.

The Sharks will need to clarify at some point so maybe it will happen relatively soon.

Yes, and since he's a non-roster player that's already happened.

I'm specifically talking about the games counting towards the suspension & who knows if/when the Sharks will clarify what's going on. If they decide to appeal the suspension it could be a while before that happens.

 

[CrypTic]

Yes, and since he's a non-roster player that's already happened.

I'm specifically talking about the games counting towards the suspension & who knows if/when the Sharks will clarify what's going on. If they decide to appeal the suspension it could be a while before that happens.

That's what I was talking about too re: the lack of clarity. It is clear that they petitioned the NHL for non-roster status. It's not currently clear (to the general public, I assume it's clear to the parties involved) what the status is re: games counting for the suspension. That is the part that I think is somewhat vague in the CBA and that, therefore, the NHL and NHLPA could allow those games to count if they want them to. I'm pretty sure we're agreeing here.

 

[hockeyball]

That's what I was talking about too re: the lack of clarity. It is clear that they petitioned the NHL for non-roster status. It's not currently clear (to the general public, I assume it's clear to the parties involved) what the status is re: games counting for the suspension. That is the part that I think is somewhat vague in the CBA and that, therefore, the NHL and NHLPA could allow those games to count if they want them to. I'm pretty sure we're agreeing here.

It depends I guess on a few things:

1) Is the NHL trying sneakily ban Raffi from the NHL
2) Is the NHL trying to punish the Sharks as much as possible (not just cap hit)
3) Is the NHL only interested in punishing Raffi and does not blame the Sharks.

 

[LeeIFBB]

Maybe the two side came to the arrangement of no appeal and non-roster status with games applied towards the suspension.

 

[CrypTic]

It depends I guess on a few things:

1) Is the NHL trying sneakily ban Raffi from the NHL
2) Is the NHL trying to punish the Sharks as much as possible (not just cap hit)
3) Is the NHL only interested in punishing Raffi and does not blame the Sharks.

1. IMO, unless Raffi appeals and his suspension is substantially reduced, they have effectively ended his career in any event. He may get to play half a season, if he manages to not make any bad hits, but I don't think he'll find a club to sign him after his contract expires. I don't think he'll get another NHL contract even if he does win an appeal but he could conceivably play more this season.

2. I don't know what more the NHL could do. AFAIK, the Sharks have the option of sending Torres to the AHL, which will help them with roster space and cap hit. I don't see how letting them have relief WRT roster space but not cap hit is worse for the SHarks.

3. If the NHL just wants Raffi gone and does not want to punish the Sharks, they and the NHLPA could give the Sharks cap relief, like they did for the Kings with Voynov. We'll see what happens.

The next thing that I expect is an appeal. I don't see any reason for Torres not to appeal. I guess if his games on non-roster status count toward his suspension, he might not want to piss off DW or risk the NHL rescinding his non-roster status or allowing it to count toward his suspension but, even then, I don't see much downside for him in appealing the suspension. It seems like the worst that could happen is being sent to the AHL for the rest of the season but is DW going to want to keep half his cap hit and maybe lose a roster spot in the AHL just to get back at Raffi for appealing? I don't see DW doing that. I'm surprised that we haven't heard that Raffi has appealed yet.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Maybe the two side came to the arrangement of no appeal and non-roster status with games applied towards the suspension.

The league has already altered the rulebook to suspend Torres in the past. I don't see why they couldn't come to some mutual agreement here.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

The more I think about it, that very well could happen. It would save the league from having to go to a neutral arbitrator in court after Bettman inevitably holds it up. It lets the league set a precident for head shots and gives Torres one last chance to play. Would explain why Wingels knows nothing of an appeal and why both sidrs have been so quiet since.

 

[WineShark]

It depends I guess on a few things:

1) Is the NHL trying sneakily ban Raffi from the NHL
2) Is the NHL trying to punish the Sharks as much as possible (not just cap hit)
3) Is the NHL only interested in punishing Raffi and does not blame the Sharks.

Just speculation, but the parties in this dance have to pick sides now. The parties are DW, NHL, PA, and Raffi.

Despite the impact on Torres, it's the League in the most tenuous spot. I believe an argument can be made the CBA isn't clear and the League is abusing their authority to single out a player and end his career.

If that's a risk to the League, I'm guessing they will want to make nice with the Sharks who could be a party in Federal Court to a suit. Granting the Sharks some relief in the matter in exchange for going along with the program would be in the Leagues best interest.

Torres has to appeal. The League might reduce the suspension in exchange for Raffi going along with the program. The PA probably prefers that too because they are conflicted defending Raffi, but don't want the League to set this precedent.

In the end, I would speculate the League stays out of Federal Court by cutting Torres suspension, the Sharks get both cap relie in some way, and the roster spot back. Raffi gets a shorter sentence and we see him on the Sharks again this year.

I'm guessing there is also some discussion with Raffi that any subsequent blind side hit or head shot will be an automatic one year ban.

Speculation but I can only imagine the intrigue playing out in back offices.