Jim Benning tries to pull a fast one...

[calgaryblood]

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2016/03...ctual-mistake/

Not a lot has gone right for the Canucks recently. You can add Nikita Tryamkin’s contract to that list.

The Canucks tried to sign him earlier than they did, but to a three-year-deal. It was a contract that was rejected by the NHL because it was not in accordance with CBA rules.

The NHL subsequently sent out an email blast to the league that wasn’t exactly flattering for Canucks management.

The email was sent to Benning, but all the league’s GMs and AGMs were CC’d.

In it, the NHL pointed out that Tryamkin’s date of birth is August, 30 1994, and by CBA rules it means he’s 22 years old. Players who are 22- or 23-years-old are to be signed to two-year entry level deals, not three.

Simply, age, as assigned by the CBA, is the player’s age on September 15 of the calendar year in which he signs a contract.

Or just maybe by the time Benning finished writing the contract Tryamkin had aged a year?

[sureLoss]

Wonder where Tryamkin's agent was on that one. The agent should not have let his client sign a 3 year ELC when he is supposed to sign a 2 year ELC

[calgaryblood]

Also wasn't Weisbrod part of the ROR disaster as well? Or is that not on him?

[The Original FFIV]

They miss Laurence Gilman. He was mr cba. Don't know what weisbrods role is there. Agm should be on top of that, especially with his Ivy League education.

[druetetective]

Wow I am even familiar with that stipulation, this guys just keeps proving he is in way over his head.

[Itse]

Yeah that's pretty basic contract stuff really. Amazing incompetence.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Also wasn't Weisbrod part of the ROR disaster as well? Or is that not on him?

Can people stop calling the ROR situation a "disaster" yet? There is very little likelyhood ROR would actually have been lost to re-entry waivers, and if the offer sheet had gone through we'd be no worse now than we are now, as ROR is establishing himself as an upper echelon center in the league.

It was an obscure situation and there was some confusingly written fine print.

This however, is ****ing hilarious. LOL Benning.

[Hockey Fan #751]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Can people stop calling the ROR situation a "disaster" yet? There is very little likelyhood ROR would actually have been lost to re-entry waivers, and if the offer sheet had gone through we'd be no worse now than we are now, as ROR is establishing himself as an upper echelon center in the league.

It was an obscure situation and there was some confusingly written fine print.

This however, is ****ing hilarious. LOL Benning.

In what way would it have not been a disaster? The Flames would have never gotten Monahan and I really find it hard to believe that at least one out of 29 other teams wouldn't have put in a claim on O'Reilly.

I feel like Colorado would have done it on principle alone, but if not them then why wouldn't the Oilers have done it? O'Reilly is better than Nugent-Hopkins and even with the offer sheet he'd be making less.

[CaptainCrunch]

Weisbrod was hugely over rated when he went to Vancouver, wasn't it Burke that mused that he didn't know what he was actually doing, and alluded to him being on vacation on the job.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Can people stop calling the ROR situation a "disaster" yet? There is very little likelyhood ROR would actually have been lost to re-entry waivers, and if the offer sheet had gone through we'd be no worse now than we are now, as ROR is establishing himself as an upper echelon center in the league.

It was an obscure situation and there was some confusingly written fine print.

This however, is ****ing hilarious. LOL Benning.

This is your opinion, backed only by the stubborn statements from former Flames management and directly countered by the statement from the NHL.

We don't have to defend those idiots because they're one of our own anymore. They ####ed up.

[Resolute 14]

At the risk of turning this thread into yet another ROR whinefest, this is what would have happened:

The league would have said O'Reilly would have had to pass through waivers. 29 other teams would have put a claim in. He would be gone. Sean Monahan would be a Colorado Avalanche centre right now.

All the Flames could really have done at that point was try to press its case and sue for damages if they could convince anyone but themselves that their interpretation was correct. But in the meantime, our rebuild would have been dead before it started.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by nik-

This is your opinion, backed only by the stubborn statements from former Flames management and directly countered by the statement from the NHL.

We don't have to defend those idiots because they're one of our own anymore. They ####ed up.

IIRC, the clear statement from the NHL only came out after the Avalanche matched the offer sheet -- it's a lot easier for the league to take a firm stance on a clause they left somewhat ambiguous when no one will be prejudiced by it than it is to do so when one team will be decimated.

[getbak]

I wouldn't call this trying to pull a fast one. As the old saying goes, never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Mike F

IIRC, the clear statement from the NHL only came out after the Avalanche matched the offer sheet -- it's a lot easier for the league to take a firm stance on a clause they left somewhat ambiguous when no one will be prejudiced by it than it is to do so when one team will be decimated.

Well the Avs pretty much immediately matched and the waivers thing didn't even come up until afterwards. Why would the NHL just release a statement on something that wasn't even a question yet?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by The Original FFIV

They miss Laurence Gilman. He was mr cba. Don't know what weisbrods role is there. Agm should be on top of that, especially with his Ivy League education.

That seems to be a common question no matter where he's working.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by nik-

Well the Avs pretty much immediately matched and the waivers thing didn't even come up until afterwards. Why would the NHL just release a statement on something that wasn't even a question yet?

I swear it was a backroom deal.. Give him an offer we can match and in return we'll overpay on a trade later. Its the only way I see Berra being worth a 2nd round pick, because seriously..

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by nik-

Well the Avs pretty much immediately matched and the waivers thing didn't even come up until afterwards. Why would the NHL just release a statement on something that wasn't even a question yet?

I'm not saying they intentionally waited, I'm saying that when they released the statement no team would be negatively impacted, which makes it really easy to take a hard line position.

[Go_Flames4ever]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I'm not saying they intentionally waited, I'm saying that when they released the statement no team would be negatively impacted, which makes it really easy to take a hard line position.

Wasn't it not a statement from the NHL? But rather an off-the-cuff answer by Daly when asked a question by a reporter (Johnson) I think?

There were just too many ambiguous language in the MOU at the time and the way this may have played out if the Avs didn't match could've been different. There was just no guarantee that everything was definitive when we're dealing with what-if's.

I think what the League interprets may not always be the only way it is interpreted - see the Wideman fiasco, from 20 to 10 games.

[opendoor]

The MOU wording wasn't particularly ambiguous:

All Players on a Club's Reserve List and Restricted Free Agent List will be exmpt from the application of CBA 13.23 Waivers in the case of a mid-season signing.

For further clarity, if Club A trades such a Player to Club B and Club B signs the Player to an SPC, such Player will be exempt from the application of CBA 13.23.

If the exemption applied to a team signing any player on any team's Reserve List (which is what the Flames seemed to argue) then the example in the second sentence wouldn't have been necessary. Why would it matter that a player was traded from Club A to Club B before the latter signed him if any player on any team's reserve list was exempt? Not to mention the final draft of the CBA made it abundantly clear what the intention of the negotiated rule was.

There are really 3 possibilities:

1) They didn't know about the rule.

2) They didn't realize O'Reilly had played KHL games after the lockout ended.

3) They were aware of both of the above, but were willing to gamble their 1st rounder and embarrass themselves publicly just to sign a guy to an offer sheet.

None of those scenarios speaks well of management's competence, but to me it's pretty obvious that scenarios 1 or 2 are the most likely.

[Madrox]

I remember hearing at multiple teams had made offers to O'Reilly at the time, but I can't find a source on that now. Am I remembering incorrectly?