[News] UPD: VGK/ANA Dadonov deal voided by the NHL

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Well, this is a forum based on opinions. Let’s call them the points relevant to the current dispute. Can you find something in the wording that would contradict these points?

1. Once Player is fit to play he must return, so the cap situation must be fixed.
vs.

2. Once Player is fit to play, the cap situation must be fixed before Player can return.

Basically the same sentence, but subtle difference in where the action trigger is. We know the rule intends #1, but the wording is actually closer to #2.

Originally Posted by Robbob

Heard on the radio that the tax difference between Vegas and Anaheim could be close to 900k for the duration of the contract. Could see why California is probably on his no trade list.

Sounds like really lazy napkin math that ignores reality (escrow, multi-jurisdictional tax, deductions on taxable income, marital status, etc.). Factoring all those things you're probably looking at closer to $280-350k in California state taxes next year - which is plenty reason enough for an NTC.

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Does anyone know if there is a contract that governs a trade itself? Like an agreement between Vegas and Ottawa when Vegas acquired Dadonov? Would that not be relevant here in terms of establishing which team was responsible for what?

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

1. Once Player is fit to play he must return, so the cap situation must be fixed.
vs.

2. Once Player is fit to play, the cap situation must be fixed before Player can return.

Basically the same sentence, but subtle difference in where the action trigger is. We know the rule intends #1, but the wording is actually closer to #2.

Your argument assumes that the two are mutually exclusive. Let’s go back to basic logic.

1. Player must return to play when fit to do so.

2. Cap situation must be fixed before player returns to play.

Therefore, cap situation must be fixed by the time the player is fit to play.

It’s not as if teams don’t know the anticipated timeline for players’ returns. They are responsible to fix their cap situations in time for the players to return when they’re ready.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by ThisIsAnOutrage

Does anyone know if there is a contract that governs a trade itself? Like an agreement between Vegas and Ottawa when Vegas acquired Dadonov? Would that not be relevant here in terms of establishing which team was responsible for what?

I don't have any idea but here's what I suppose: I doubt there is a separate contract, as it would be subject to the NHL Constitution and Bylaws. The league has a protocol, and the NHLPA has a vested interested in it, so I think that's where it goes for resolution, subject to the dispute resolution procedures of the CBA.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Reign of Fire

Must be killing Gary to rule against his beloved Vegas, why else would this take so long?

Because NHLPA is also involved and investigating. NHL and NHLPA will want to make sure everything is done right.

[PeteMoss]

Kind of absurd this is taking this long. Doesn't seem to be a tough question to answer.

If you want to punish one of the teams involved - Ottawa or Vegas - that would seem to be a separate question.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Reign of Fire

Must be killing Gary to rule against his beloved Vegas, why else would this take so long?

He won't, he will find a way to let Vegas off the hook. The same way they have ignored the fact Martinez has been ready to play for like a month now.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Kind of absurd this is taking this long. Doesn't seem to be a tough question to answer.

If you want to punish one of the teams involved - Ottawa or Vegas - that would seem to be a separate question.

Yup. No way the trade can be approved. Dadonov has rights.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Your argument assumes that the two are mutually exclusive. Let’s go back to basic logic.

1. Player must return to play when fit to do so.

2. Cap situation must be fixed before player returns to play.

Therefore, cap situation must be fixed by the time the player is fit to play.

It’s not as if teams don’t know the anticipated timeline for players’ returns. They are responsible to fix their cap situations in time for the players to return when they’re ready.

I agree that is the intent, but neither of our #1s are actually what is written.

We can speculate that there are separate bylaws or directives to the teams that govern this and make it all crystal clear, but the information we can see is actually as clear as mud.


This may be the exact kind of argument happening around Dadonov's NTC. The contract language may be ambiguous about how/where/when the NTC list needs to go, especially in the event of a trade. It normally isn't an issue as it is governed by the self-interest of teams (maintaining their reputation among players) - but in this case we have two teams (OTT and VGK) who have demonstrated they don't really care about treating players well and maintaining a good reputation.

Plead ignorance and beg for forgiveness vs. seek permission/clarification in advance.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yup. No way the trade can be approved. Dadonov has rights.

It seems like there are a lot of similarities with a wrongful termination situation - the remedy is rarely to return someone to that workplace. Of course there are a lot of differences here and it's within a CBA, but I wonder if sending him back to VGK is the best way to make him whole?

All things considered it probably is, but of course it would be more delicious if VGK remained on the hook for his full salary and AAV (maybe less the buried penalty amount on the AAV to be 'fair' to VGK ), and Dadonov becomes a UFA with an exemption to be eligible for playoffs wherever he signs.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Trades do end up getting rejected for a variety of reasons - they may not always go public but I'm guessing the player usually knows when this happens. Don't they usually just remain with the team that failed to trade them and life continues on (albeit more awkwardly)?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

It seems like there are a lot of similarities with a wrongful termination situation - the remedy is rarely to return someone to that workplace. Of course there are a lot of differences here and it's within a CBA, but I wonder if sending him back to VGK is the best way to make him whole?

All things considered it probably is, but of course it would be more delicious if VGK remained on the hook for his full salary and AAV (maybe less the buried penalty amount on the AAV to be 'fair' to VGK ), and Dadonov becomes a UFA with an exemption to be eligible for playoffs wherever he signs.

I think the NHL will do exactly that except they won't make Vegas pay anything. One way or another the NHL will get Vegas out of this.

[Eric Vail]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

It seems like there are a lot of similarities with a wrongful termination situation - the remedy is rarely to return someone to that workplace. Of course there are a lot of differences here and it's within a CBA, but I wonder if sending him back to VGK is the best way to make him whole?

All things considered it probably is, but of course it would be more delicious if VGK remained on the hook for his full salary and AAV (maybe less the buried penalty amount on the AAV to be 'fair' to VGK ), and Dadonov becomes a UFA with an exemption to be eligible for playoffs wherever he signs.

Dadonov is owed $6.5 million next year along with what is remaining of his $5 million this year. Someone has to pay that. Making him a UFA doesn't help him as no one is going to offer him that kind of money. His production has fallen significantly since he signed, which is why 31 year olds sign multi-year deals.

[lazypucker]

The league should just make Vegas payout the full amount of Dadanov's contract for this year and next, cap hit stays, and also dock 10 points from the standings for this season and next, also take away some draft picks.

I am sick and tired of teams like Vegas and Tampa bending the cap rules...

[PeteMoss]

FWIW - Capfriendly says that the NHL has treated Dadanov on Vegas cap the last two games.

They are in rough shape cap wise without it and basically can't activate anyone without clearing cap space.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

It seems like there are a lot of similarities with a wrongful termination situation - the remedy is rarely to return someone to that workplace. Of course there are a lot of differences here and it's within a CBA, but I wonder if sending him back to VGK is the best way to make him whole?

All things considered it probably is, but of course it would be more delicious if VGK remained on the hook for his full salary and AAV (maybe less the buried penalty amount on the AAV to be 'fair' to VGK ), and Dadonov becomes a UFA with an exemption to be eligible for playoffs wherever he signs.

The employee is blocking the trade - Not being terminated.

If you block a relocation as an employee you stay with your current work division. You don't become a 'FA" (Unless those are the 2 options (Layoff,etc) which doesnt exist in NHL contracts)

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

Trades do end up getting rejected for a variety of reasons - they may not always go public but I'm guessing the player usually knows when this happens. Don't they usually just remain with the team that failed to trade them and life continues on (albeit more awkwardly)?

Yup, happens all the time.

TJ and Kadri are a recent example from the Flames that actually did go public, but as you say, most get nixed before they ever do.

The players know, and it's part of the job.

[GioforPM]

Yes, this is no different than if they knew about the list, still negotiated the trade, asked Dadonov to waive, and he said no, just like with Kadri.

They may well buy him out off season, but that’s within the rules.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

It seems like there are a lot of similarities with a wrongful termination situation - the remedy is rarely to return someone to that workplace. Of course there are a lot of differences here and it's within a CBA, but I wonder if sending him back to VGK is the best way to make him whole?

All things considered it probably is, but of course it would be more delicious if VGK remained on the hook for his full salary and AAV (maybe less the buried penalty amount on the AAV to be 'fair' to VGK ), and Dadonov becomes a UFA with an exemption to be eligible for playoffs wherever he signs.

What you are referring to only exists under the Canada Labour Code, is actually called Unjust Dismissal, and very rarely applies.

Wrongful dismissal in every other way simply means the employer does not have just cause to terminate, thus the employee is entitled to notice or pay in lieu thereof.

[N-E-B]

Vegas is a joke and they're quickly gaining a reputation of not caring about their players.