Ryan O Reilly

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

$6.5 million shouldn't be the starting point for ROR. That number is artificially raised due to an offersheet and offersheets by their very nature are overpayments.

Offer sheets matched, by virtue of matching, are fair value payments.
Offers not matched, like Penner, is an overpayment.
Obviously the Avs felt ROR was worth that or would not have matched.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Offer sheets matched, by virtue of matching, are fair value payments.
Offers not matched, like Penner, is an overpayment.
Obviously the Avs felt ROR was worth that or would not have matched.

Based on Sakic's comments it sounds like he might want more than 6.5. 6 to me would be fair. 7 or 7.5 seems a bit steep. O'Reilly should realize they have a lot of talented young players and they are all going to need big raises. To keep that team together everyone might need to give a little. The fact he's playing hardball twice in two years doesn't scream "character" or "leader" to me.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Offer sheets matched, by virtue of matching, are fair value payments.
Offers not matched, like Penner, is an overpayment.
Obviously the Avs felt ROR was worth that or would not have matched.

I see your point, but matching also has to do with whether or not they thought it was better to overpay than lose him. It's doesn't necessarily mean they thought it was what he was worth, only that it was better than the alternative.

Part of it is also pride. No GM wants their players poached.

Having said that, they turned down a high 1st round pick and a 3rd rounder for him, so they do value him a lot. Part of building a winning team though is being able to maintain a salary structure where young players aren't paid top dollar as quickly as they were forced to with O'Reilly due to our offersheet.

[Hackey]

Avs could have had Monahan.

Anyone know who would have got O'Reilly?

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Avs could have had Monahan.

Anyone know who would have got O'Reilly?

Flames or Avs.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by the2bears

Flames or Avs.

IIRC he would have gone on waivers so team with first waiver priority would have been able to claim him.

[flamesfan1297]

Originally Posted by Hackey

IIRC he would have gone on waivers so team with first waiver priority would have been able to claim him.

How does waiver priority work? Does it goe by standings?

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Originally Posted by Hackey

IIRC he would have gone on waivers so team with first waiver priority would have been able to claim him.

Outcome was never officially communicated one way or the other.. Dead horse is dead

[Roof-Daddy]

At the time, Columbus had first dibs on anybody sent through waivers because it was still based on the previous seasons final standings IIRC.

However, as Hugh Jarmes said an official decision was never made because Colorado matched.

[dying4acup]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Offer sheets matched, by virtue of matching, are fair value payments.
Offers not matched, like Penner, is an overpayment.
Obviously the Avs felt ROR was worth that or would not have matched.

Matching the offer sheet likely had (almost) everything to do with a 5M cap hit and (almost) nothing to do with the breakdown of the payout.

The 6.5M QO, was obviously a ploy by Feaster to deter the aves from matching. Oreilly knew it. Flames knew it. Aves knew it.

[sureLoss]

Don't know how you can say the outcome wasn't officially communicated when the Flames press release about the situation clearly states the league told them RoR would have had to clear waivers after the fact.

Now whether that would have held up after legal challenges and arbitration is an academic point because Colorado matched before they could go down that road. In many ways it was good fortune for the Flames that Greg Sherman matched the offer sheet so quickly.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Don't know how you can say the outcome wasn't officially communicated when the Flames press release about the situation clearly states the league told them RoR would have had to clear waivers after the fact.

Link? I don't recall this at all. I remember Feaster saying the Flames did their homework and were confident that their interpretation of the rule would prevent O'Reilly from reaching waivers. I didn't know about an official release though.

Edit:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle9226312/

There doesn’t appear to be any protection for a team signing a free agent from another club, but Feaster said in the statement that the Flames’ interpretation of Article 13.23 “was, and continues to be, different than the NHL’s current interpretation.”

He also said that the prospect of losing two high draft picks as well as O’Reilly himself is now a moot point since Colorado matched the offer sheet.

The NHL declined to clarify whether O’Reilly would have had to clear waivers if the Avalanche refused to match Calgary’s offer sheet.

I suppose when they talk about the NHL's current interpretation but it does go on to say that the NHL declined to clarify, not entirely black and white.

[sureLoss]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=658088

"Prior to tendering the offer sheet for Ryan O'Reilly we, as a hockey operations department, examined whether there were any impediments to our successfully securing the services of the player including, but not limited to, his having played in the KHL after the start of the current NHL season," Calgary general manager Jay Feaster said in a statement.

"Our interpretation of the Article 13 transition rules governing restricted free agents ("RFA"), and the applicability of Article 13.23 under the new Collective Bargaining Agreement to such RFA's was, and continues to be, different than the NHL's current interpretation as articulated to us this morning. Moreover, throughout our discussions, the player’s representative shared our interpretation and position with respect to the non-applicability of Article 13.23.

Feaster says the league "articulated" their position to the Flames on the RoR offer sheet that morning. While the league wouldn't publicly comment on it further, the official position the league took was communicated to the Flames.

Also given that the language of the CBA was clarified to address the situation in the final form of the CBA document, I would say the NHL and NHLPA made their official stance on the issue crystal clear.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Outcome was never officially communicated one way or the other.. Dead horse is dead

Exactly.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=658088



Feaster says the league "articulated" their position to the Flames on the RoR offer sheet that morning. While the league wouldn't publicly comment on it further, the official position the league took was communicated to the Flames.

Also given that the language of the CBA was clarified to address the situation in the final form of the CBA document, I would say the NHL and NHLPA made their official stance on the issue crystal clear.

They also made their position on Kovalchuk and the Devil's cap circumvention clear and then they changed their minds later.

We'll never know for sure how the situation would have been resolved.

[Read Only]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

They also made their position on Kovalchuk and the Devil's cap circumvention clear and then they changed their minds later.

We'll never know for sure how the situation would have been resolved.

So you think that we would have lost ROR and then 3 years later the league would have changed their minds and awarded him back to us?

[T@T]

The league never would have made the flames put O'Reilly on waivers based on an interpretation of a new rule that the ink wasn't dried yet. I think only one GM caught on and a few other CBA freaks.

Sherman didn't know and nor did O'Reilly's agent.

Bettman would have been crucifed had he let that happen.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by T@T

The league never would have made the flames put O'Reilly on waivers based on an interpretation of a new rule that the ink wasn't dried yet. I think only one GM caught on and a few other CBA freaks.

Sherman didn't know and nor did O'Reilly's agent.

Bettman would have been crucifed had he let that happen.

agreed these are the same guys who still gave new jersey a first round pick after saying they had to forfeit one

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Read Only

So you think that we would have lost ROR and then 3 years later the league would have changed their minds and awarded him back to us?

I think there's no way the league would've let the Flames lose the first rounder and O'Reilly for nothing. That makes everyone look bad, the Flames, the Avs and especially the league. Pretty sure the league was glad the Avs matched so that they didn't have to rule on he situation.

Let's not forget that the Flames weren't the only team looking to sign O'Reilly to the offer sheet. Clearly their wording was ambiguous.

[Hackey]

Alright so Colombus would have had priority. All I wanted to know. Interesting to think that he could have been added to their crop of young talent.