Should Feaster get fired over the O'Reilly offersheet fiasco

[zamler]

For me it is very simple. You don't roll the dice like this with so much uncertainty. The fact that Feaster did makes me wonder what else he will do without doing his due diligence. For that reason, I think he should be let go.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Robbob

tried reading through a bunch of posts (got to about page 60) and people keep saying that if feaster was wrong we would have lost O'Reilly through waivers. I am pretty sure if that was the NHL decision the they wouldn't put him through waivers and he would have joined the team next year. Just would have lost his services for the remaining 28 games this year. Depending on our draft pick I might still make that.

might be interesting to revisit this at the draft and see what might have happened in an alternate reality where Colorado did not match. Might make for some interesting summer fodder.

I'm almost 100% sure that that's impossible. If the NHL's position about him needing waivers held, it wouldn't have been the Flames choice whether or not to put him through waivers. You can't just sign a player to a 1 way contract and not have him be on your roster. A team's Active Roster is defined as anyone on their Reserve List with a valid contract who isn't injured, loaned, or designated as a Non-Roster player. O'Reilly wouldn't fit any of of those, at least if he was expecting to get paid.

For instance, if the Flames went out and signed Arnott tomorrow, they couldn't just pay him and not have him appear on their roster. He'd have to be on the Flames' roster until they took further action (loaning him, putting him on IR, or getting the league to classify him as Non-Roster) and the act of getting O'Reilly on the Flames roster would've required waivers (assuming the NHL's initial interpretation that he was subject to 13.23 was correct). Bob McKenzie and Scott Burnside also confirmed that fact with the NHL.


Daly may have been incorrect in his interpretation of the exemption with regards to how it impacts O'Reilly, but if he wasn't then he would've needed waivers to get on the Flames' roster just like guys like Nabokov and Wellwood have in the past.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The lack of respect to draft picks (primarily 2nd rounders) dates back to Darryl Sutter but we have seen Feaster give up two now (Kotalik and Cammalleri). It's pretty clear that the organization as a whole considers draft picks currency and that there isn't much of an appetite to build a team from within.

I agree with you in that I think the Flames, have undervalued 2nd and even 3rd round picks for far too long. At least we know Darryl highly valued his first round picks and is highly reluctant to part with one. Feaster and Weisbord? Not so much.

But to be fair, 2nd round picks have because somewhat of a default currency if a team wanted a solid player wihout giving up a roster player. I've been pretty critical of Feaster for having traded 2nd round picks so ya I don't think the Flames, in their current position, should be trading high draft picks and then missing the playoffs.

[dino7c]

you guys realize that if the Flames got ROR they would be trading one of the vets to make cap space...likely for picks

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Robbob

tried reading through a bunch of posts (got to about page 60) and people keep saying that if feaster was wrong we would have lost O'Reilly through waivers. I am pretty sure if that was the NHL decision the they wouldn't put him through waivers and he would have joined the team next year. Just would have lost his services for the remaining 28 games this year. Depending on our draft pick I might still make that.

might be interesting to revisit this at the draft and see what might have happened in an alternate reality where Colorado did not match. Might make for some interesting summer fodder.

Even if the NHLPA or O'Reilly agreed to sit out for a year (pretty unlikely imo), Calgary would be on the hook for the 10 million.

6.5 per year for ROR is steep enough. Pretty sure not even the most ardent Feaster supporters think ROR is worth 10 million for one year.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by FAN

I agree with you in that I think the Flames, have undervalued 2nd and even 3rd round picks for far too long. At least we know Darryl highly valued his first round picks and is highly reluctant to part with one. Feaster and Weisbord? Not so much.

But to be fair, 2nd round picks have because somewhat of a default currency if a team wanted a solid player wihout giving up a roster player. I've been pretty critical of Feaster for having traded 2nd round picks so ya I don't think the Flames, in their current position, should be trading high draft picks and then missing the playoffs.

considering ROR was a colorado 2nd round pick, i would concur.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Even if the NHLPA or O'Reilly agreed to sit out for a year (pretty unlikely imo), Calgary would be on the hook for the 10 million.

6.5 per year for ROR is steep enough. Pretty sure not even the most ardent Feaster supporters think ROR is worth 10 million for one year.

its a 5 mil cap hit any way you slice it...fans don't have to pool their money together and pay the salaries. Would have sucked to have him sit for a year

[FAN]

Originally Posted by dino7c

you guys realize that if the Flames got ROR they would be trading one of the vets to make cap space...likely for picks

You mean the Flames would get a top 5 or top 10 1st round pick back?

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by FAN

You know, after giving this whole "fiasco" some thought, I am willing to forgive Feaster, Weisbrod, & co. for not being aware of the rule since the new CBA hasn't been finalized in written form yet, and there does seem to be a lot of hockey people, including GMs, who were not fully aware of the waiver rule.

With that said, I am not ready to forgive Feaster for being so ignorant of the fact that there may indeed be another interpretation of the rule and not checking in with league office. I am also not ready to forgive Feaster for being so stubborn and cocky to reject the interpretation of the league office and risk the assets of the Calgary Flames.

but Feaster's statement says he was well aware of that clause. I don't think that is up for debate. He says they chose to interpret it differently.

so, again, it comes down to Feaster rolling the dice on his interpretation being correct.

Is that a good risk? Depends, it seems, on one's support of Feaster.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by dino7c

its a 5 mil cap hit any way you slice it...fans don't have to pool their money together and pay the salaries. Would have sucked to have him sit for a year

5 mill cap hit for a player not on your roster, means a weaker roster in the year he isn't playing, esp for a team close to the cap.

Sure, fans don't have to pay the money...but if i were part of the ownership group, having to swallow the 3.5 million would exactly have me grinning from ear to ear either.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by FAN

You mean the Flames would get a top 5 or top 10 1st round pick back?

no, that was a response to the Flames wasting 2nd and thirds...ROR is better at age 21 than 90% of guys drafted in the first round

[FAN]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

but Feaster's statement says he was well aware of that clause. I don't think that is up for debate. He says they chose to interpret it differently.

so, again, it comes down to Feaster rolling the dice on his interpretation being correct.

Is that a good risk? Depends, it seems, on one's support of Feaster.

Ya that's what he said. Is that really what happened or did Feaster simply made a PR statement? I think it's up for debate, but like I said, I'm willing to forgive Feaster if he wasn't aware of the rule, but I'm not willing to forgive an ignorant and defiant Feaster who took the risks he supposedly took.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by dino7c

you guys realize that if the Flames got ROR they would be trading one of the vets to make cap space...likely for picks

Originally Posted by dino7c

that was a response to the Flames wasting 2nd and thirds...

I don't get it...

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by FAN

Ya that's what he said. Is that really what happened or did Feaster simply made a PR statement? I think it's up for debate, but like I said, I'm willing to forgive Feaster if he wasn't aware of the rule, but I'm not willing to forgive an ignorant and defiant Feaster who took the risks he supposedly took.

well, its either he knew, or he didn't.

The former is a risky strategy, that could have backfired on the Flames.

The latter is incompetence for someone steering the hockey operations of a 200 million franchise (forbes valuation).

neither is particularly appealing. Nor should they fill people with a lot of confidence

[Brick]

What about Greg Sherman, the Av's GM?

He spent millions unnecessarily if the waiver thing is true, not to mention the extra millions he will probably have to spend when other team members salaries come up for renewal.

Feaster may or may not have had a near miss, depending on what you hear, but Sherman cost the Av's owners a lot of money, period. Whether on not the waiver thing is true or not, he could have signed O'Reilly for less than what he ended up paying. Same goes for future salaries of other Av's players.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

well, its either he knew, or he didn't.

The former is a risky strategy, that could have backfired on the Flames.

The latter is incompetence for someone steering the hockey operations of a 200 million franchise (forbes valuation).

neither is particularly appealing. Nor should they fill people with a lot of confidence

Like I said, I'm willing to excuse him for such "incompetence" given the likelihood that there are other normally competent GMs who were unaware of the waiver rule at the time. But if you are talking about incompetence, the incompetence extends to Weisbrod and whoever is in Feaster's inner circle.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by FAN

Like I said, I'm willing to excuse him for such "incompetence" given the likelihood that there are other normally competent GMs who were unaware of the waiver rule at the time. But if you are talking about incompetence, the incompetence extends to Weisbrod and whoever is in Feaster's inner circle.

Other GM's didn't know, but how many of those GM's put out an offer sheet? If they did, or were planning to, it's likely their ignorance of the rule might no longer exist.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by FAN

Like I said, I'm willing to excuse him for such "incompetence" given the likelihood that there are other normally competent GMs who were unaware of the waiver rule at the time. But if you are talking about incompetence, the incompetence extends to Weisbrod and whoever is in Feaster's inner circle.

correct.

That fact frightens me, and should worry everyone

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by FAN

You mean the Flames would get a top 5 or top 10 1st round pick back?

ROR is better than a top 5 or 10 pick most likely...ROR was drafted in 2009, there are what two or maybe three guys drafted in the first round that year that have put up 55+

[moon]

Originally Posted by dino7c

ROR is better than a top 5 or 10 pick most likely...ROR was drafted in 2009, there are what two or maybe three guys drafted in the first round that year that have put up 55+

3 (Tavares, Kane and Duchene) with a 4th (Schenn) likely to do it this year.

If that draft is redone right now he probably goes 6th at best behind those 4 and Hedman.