[sven]

Originally Posted by blankall

The CBA provision mentions absolutely nothing about "at the time of an SPC coming into effect". I agree there is a distinction, but not one dealt with in the CBA.\

In fact, the CBA suggests the exact opposite:

Obviously, we're dealing with an offer sheet and not a trade here. The distinction is that the the player is not an RFA for the new team in the case of the offer sheet. However, if the NHL is going to apply that distinction, they need to apply it consistently and apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly has been signed to an offer sheet by Colorado. According to Daly's interpretation he ceased to be an RFA, and must now pass through waivers.

Daly is the one misinterpreting things here. It's pretty clear. Once again, Daly is no more of an authority on the correct interpretation than any one of us. If Daly is going to keep with his interpretation, he must apply it evenly. O'Reilly needs to pass through waivers. Columbus, Florida, and the Islanders cannot afford to pay his salary next year of 6.5 million. Washington and Buffalo cannot afford to fit it under their cap structure.

If Daly is goign to open his mouth about this, the following needs to be enforced immediately:

1) O'Reilly ceases to be an RFA and is placed on waivers.

2) Calgary the first team in line that can afford O'Reilly's contract claims him, while giving up nothing.

3) Colorado then sues the NHL, finds out Daly's interpretation is totally wrong. They can't go after the Flames, as they are innocent party who merely acquired a player off waivers. They get some kind of recourse against the NHL (money or additional picks). Whatever it's not really a concern to the Flames.

QED

Dude, thats ridonk...

Thank God AVs matched.

We just dodged a bullet folks