Should Feaster get fired over the O'Reilly offersheet fiasco

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Pointman

There was nothing wrong with offer sheet from NHL stand point. He just had to go through waivers. NHL didn't flag Nabokov's offer sheet either.

Yeah, no kidding. Could you imagine the NHLPA reaction if the NHL piped up and prevented a member from getting a completely legitimate contract?

It would be totally outside Daly's responsibility.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Except for the fact that O'Reilly's agent said he didn't even know about the rule.

Someone is lying somewhere. Either the agent wanted his client to get a contract so badly that he was willing to screw the Flames, or Feaster is lying and is trying tp pass the blame.

Someone is clearly lying and I don't see what the agent has to gain by lying here.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

No, that is not correct. If both parties gave you confirmation of their interpretation of the clause and it is the same interpretation, it is not longer ambiguous. The only parties that matter are the parties to the contract, in this case the NHL and the NHLPA. The logical thing is that you ask them first. You only have to make an independent judgment if the interpretation of the parties in question differs. Then you have to make an independent judgment. No lawyer in their right mind would make an independent judgment that opposes the interpretation of the parties to the actual contract. Not asking the NHL and NHLPA is absolutely insane, asking another party that is not a party to the contract (ROR's agent) and using that as confirmation of your erroneous interpretation is crazy.

That's not right at all. We do it all the time...

[Brick]

Originally Posted by polak

So Feaster just gets a pass for not checking himself but the NHL doesn't?

Interesting.

The NHL should make the rules clear to everyone. It is obvious that this is not the case in this instance. Feaster and O'Reilly's agent interpreted the rules to mean he would not have to clear waivers. If that was not true, Bill Daly, or whomever should have clarified it before, not after, the fact. Anyway, it is all moot, as Colorado signed him. Time to move on.

[North East Goon]

Originally Posted by Pointman

His agent let him play those two games at KHL, thus significally reducing his leverage in contract negotionations (since after those games other teams could not offersheet him).

But an idiotic team did make the offer.

[Muta]

Someone clearly knew about this rule; someone obviously wrote it somewhere, that's why we are where we are at this moment.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by The Coppernian One

Daly's argument is that Ryan O'Reilly is on Colorado's RFA list (that already exists). Therefore, under the CBA, he does not need to pass waivers to play for Colorado. He is not on anyone else's already existing list, so he would have to pass through waivers to play for them (unless his rights were traded, which they were not).

He was Colorado's RFA. As soon as he signs a contract, he ceases to be an RFA.

By the interpretation offered by Daly, the order for the Flames would have gone like this:

1) RFA
2) Signs offer sheet
3) Moves to new team, but is no longer RFA since has signed offer sheet.
4) Goes through waivers sicne he is no longer an RFA.

Don't know why Colorado signing him results in him continuing to be an RFA after step 3.

Feaster is 100% in the right here. Daly interpretation makes no logical sense under the CBA. If he is going to insist on that interpreation, he should not apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly must pass through waivers. The Flames are most likely the first team who can claim him. We get him for free. Feaster get on the phone.

[Eddie Bronze]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

The only comparable I can come up with is when Chicago messed up on their key RFAs, forcing them to have to trade some guys they didn't want to. That blunder may have cost them a cup or two.

And if memory serves it pretty much did cost Tallon his job no?

That's the first thing I thought of when the news came out this morning about the waiver issue.

You can't have someone running your club who doesn't understand the rules of the CBA. Saying they had a different interpretation of the rules just doesn't cut it. You can't guess on this stuff, you can't "interpret". You have to know and that's final. The Flames were within the skin of their teeth of losing a potentially very high 1st round pick, 3rd rounder and Ryan O'Reilly all in one fell swoop with nothing to show for it.

It seems to me right now the rest of the league is very likely looking at the people running this team and laughing. I don't know how they couldn't be at this point, it's a hugely embarrassing moment for the entire organization. Whether they narrowly survived this now is a moot point, there has to be some form of consequence for not even understanding the rules within which you are operating.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by JayP

Someone is clearly lying and I don't see what the agent has to gain by lying here.

If the agent knew and came clean, it would give the Avs all the leverage as it would take offersheets right off the table. It would be in O'Reilly's and his agent's best interest to keep it quiet.

[CGY12]

I actually feel really bad for Feaster. He is getting absolutely roasted on the net, radio and TV, even as low as fat jokes. Numerous people are to blame for this, I'm actually stunned Pat Morris didn't know about this either. Feaster seems like a really good man, this is unforunate. Remember people he does have a wife and kids.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CGY12

I actually feel really bad for Feaster. He is getting absolutely roasted on the net, radio and TV, even as low as fat jokes. Numerous people are to blame for this, I'm actually stunned Pat Morris didn't know about this either. Feaster seems like a really good man, this is unforunate. Remember people he does have a wife and kids.

True, but I don't think it would be very classy to start insulting them too. They didn't have anything to do with it.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

How much would khl pay checks have played into that. I.e. would he be entitled to a much greater sum by playing those 2 games?

I have no idea, except from the interview I just quoted, where O'Riley says that as per contract, he could come back to NHL as soon, as he gets an offer. This may be the big mistake by an agent, as "getting an offer" is not the same as "start of the season". It was two years deal, so it wasn't strictly lock-out contract, it was full-time contract with an "out" clause. No info on him getting more money for hanging out for those two extra games.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by CGY12

I actually feel really bad for Feaster. He is getting absolutely roasted on the net, radio and TV, even as low as fat jokes. Numerous people are to blame for this, I'm actually stunned Pat Morris didn't know about this either. Feaster seems like a really good man, this is unforunate. Remember people he does have a wife and kids.

Agreed, I feel kind bad, seems like an honest mistake.

Just wish he wouldn't have lied with the "different interpretation crap" ... either own up or saying nothing at all. He didn't help his cause there.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by sven

I agree that if one was to interpret the rules in your asinine way, it should be consistent in that now AVs should waive him.

Regardless, Flames would have no chance in hell of getting him

You think Columbus, Washington, Florida Buffalo would ALL pass?

haha

Columbus and Buffalo will not pay a player 6.5 million. Washington and Buffalo don't have the cap space to do so. If Buffalo does take it on, they won't have the cap space to match on offer sheet on Hodgson.

Washington is the only team with a chance of taking him. They are unlikely to given their current commitments. If they do sign him, they lose Ribeiro.

Originally Posted by The Coppernian One

Just because he ceases to be an RFA under your definition does not mean he ceases to be on Colorado's RFA List that already exists. The CBA specifically says that players on a team's list do not need to pass through waivers to play for that team.

O'Reilly is on Colorado's RFA list because he was an RFA whose rights belonged to Colorado at the time that list was created and filed. The fact that he gets signed by anyone has no impact upon his inclusion on that already existing list. The CBA deals with this clearly, he does not need to pass through waivers to play for Colorado. He does need to pass waivers for anyone else unless Colorado has traded O'Reilly to that team, which is not what happened here.

Once he's signed, he is no longer a RFA. He then comes off the RFA list. I cannot find the entire CBA text online, only this summary:

http://cdn.agilitycms.com/nhlpacom/P...oom=auto,0,694

If there is some kind of "special list" that teams submit at the beginning of each year that players cannot be removed from regardless of what contracts are negotiated, that might change my opinion.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by blankall

He was Colorado's RFA. As soon as he signs a contract, he ceases to be an RFA.

By the interpretation offered by Daly, the order for the Flames would have gone like this:

1) RFA
2) Signs offer sheet
3) Moves to new team, but is no longer RFA since has signed offer sheet.
4) Goes through waivers sicne he is no longer an RFA.

Don't know why Colorado signing him results in him continuing to be an RFA after step 3.

Feaster is 100% in the right here. Daly interpretation makes no logical sense under the CBA. If he is going to insist on that interpreation, he should not apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly must pass through waivers. The Flames are most likely the first team who can claim him. We get him for free. Feaster get on the phone.

You're completely misrepresenting the NHL's position to belabor your baffling conclusion.

[Dolan]

Originally Posted by blankall

He was Colorado's RFA. As soon as he signs a contract, he ceases to be an RFA.

By the interpretation offered by Daly, the order for the Flames would have gone like this:

1) RFA
2) Signs offer sheet
3) Moves to new team, but is no longer RFA since has signed offer sheet.
4) Goes through waivers sicne he is no longer an RFA.

Don't know why Colorado signing him results in him continuing to be an RFA after step 3.

Feaster is 100% in the right here. Daly interpretation makes no logical sense under the CBA. If he is going to insist on that interpreation, he should not apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly must pass through waivers. The Flames are most likely the first team who can claim him. We get him for free. Feaster get on the phone.

Because he was on Colorado's RESERVE list and not on Calgary's reserve list.

They had left a spot on their roster for him.

Feaster is a moron and I'm embarassed to be a Flames fan.

[Azure]

Yes, and Weisbrod right behind him.

No excuse for not knowing this.

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by blankall

He was Colorado's RFA. As soon as he signs a contract, he ceases to be an RFA.

By the interpretation offered by Daly, the order for the Flames would have gone like this:

1) RFA
2) Signs offer sheet
3) Moves to new team, but is no longer RFA since has signed offer sheet.
4) Goes through waivers sicne he is no longer an RFA.

Don't know why Colorado signing him results in him continuing to be an RFA after step 3.

Feaster is 100% in the right here. Daly interpretation makes no logical sense under the CBA. If he is going to insist on that interpreation, he should not apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly must pass through waivers. The Flames are most likely the first team who can claim him. We get him for free. Feaster get on the phone.

He just needs to be on their RFA list at the start of the season to be exempt from waivers. Since he obviously was on their list, this new provision applies to him(it was added to protect the club who hold the RFA, as previously HE would have had to clear waivers).

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by blankall

Don't know why Colorado signing him results in him continuing to be an RFA

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

Avs can sign player from their RFA list in the mid-season and bring him on without waivers. It's pretty much the case of mid-season signing of RFA.

[GGG]

The PA and NHL agreed that RFA's playing after the season started would be allowed to play in the NHL.

Would the PA have ever intentionally given up their rights to have RFA's like Oreily sign an offer sheet and go to a team of their choosing. The PA wouldn't do this.

The media found the story, went to Bill Daley, the issue was already a moot point, so Daley was allowed to give an off the cuff answer without consequence. I don't think Daley had the time to actually go through this.

Daley was given a leading question by the media and answered the way he was led. And he got to drag a GM who used an offer sheet through the mud.

If Daley new this answer without thinking about it, and new that teams were putting in offer sheets on Oreily, you would think he would have sent a memo to the GM's about it. I think Daley was clueless as to this application as the rule.