View Single Post
Old 03-04-2013, 01:11 PM   #1708
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phanuthier View Post
What could have been his calculation, that he thought a 1st, 3rd and $2.5M wasn't worth a 5 minute phone call?

I know in my job, where I deal with a lot less than $2.5M mistakes, my calculated gamble is 110% sure (100% sure, plus mitigation plans for in the most ridiculous cases possible that will likely never occur)... and even if a mistake does happen that out of my control (i.e. ROR signed and comes to Calgary no problems, but gets aids on the flight in), that shows up on my annual review.
Or, that the worst case scenario is that the NHL and NHLPA clarify the language and void the offer sheet, which is exactly what I expect would have happened.

I don't see any way that the horror situation people have created of losing the picks and the cash would have come to pass given the lack of clarity in the language. The NHL would prefer not to see its franchises crippled, particularly one with fairly significant clout, and the NHLPA doesn't want the clause interpreted in a manner that restricts players. The Flames clearly would have at minimum had a strong case for a contrary interpretation, and it would likely have been fully supported by the NHLPA. If the NHL voids the deal and works with the PA to clarify the intent they are much more likely to get a result that please everyone. If they dig in their heels they're going to piss off a valued ownership group, the PA and risk an arbitrator ruling against them. I know which one I'd say is more likely to occur.
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to valo403 For This Useful Post: