[News] Kulak arb numbers. Kulak asking for $1.15M. Flames countering with 2 way $650k

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

When I look at the 3 names of Stone,Brodie and hamonic I figure 2 of them are traded before their contracts run out. Would be great to get value for them with talented prospects stepping. In. Really it's what a rebuild is supposed to do/have.

Yea I tend to agree with you and think Hamonic might be the guy to stick around until we can find grit and toughness elsewhere on the back end. Hanifin and Kylington share similar attributes to Brodie while Stone already looks to be the odd man out..

I've heard Peters used Hanifin on the right before in Carolina:

Valimaki-Hanifin
Gio-Andersson
Kylington-Hamonic

Could be the look of a future group if the big three prospects start reaching their potential.

[Jacks]

Not sure what takes so long to pick the middle point, guess the decision is 1 way or 2 way at 885K?

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Not sure what takes so long to pick the middle point, guess the decision is 1 way or 2 way at 885K?

Probably gets paid by the hour.

[FurnaceFace]

...or the arbitrator is giving them the full 48 to hammer out a deal without him needing to rule.

[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by FurnaceFace

...or the arbitrator is giving them the full 48 to hammer out a deal without him needing to rule.

For some reason I feel like Treliving has moved on and is working on his other contracts. His case on Kulak is sound, and Kulak doesn't have a living comparable to the figure he's asking for.

I suspect the arbitrators ruling will stand on this one. Does anyone know if the Flames have to opt for a 1 or 2 year contract before they know the salary or can they make that decision once they see the ruling?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

When I look at the 3 names of Stone,Brodie and hamonic I figure 2 of them are traded before their contracts run out. Would be great to get value for them with talented prospects stepping. In. Really it's what a rebuild is supposed to do/have.

Wait, what? We're doing another rebuild already?

[Poe969]

I think he means those guys can be traded because there are guys within the system that can take their place. Rebuilding got us those prospects and soon they can play and the team can gain assets at the same time

[FlamesFanTrev]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

For some reason I feel like Treliving has moved on and is working on his other contracts. His case on Kulak is sound, and Kulak doesn't have a living comparable to the figure he's asking for.

I suspect the arbitrators ruling will stand on this one. Does anyone know if the Flames have to opt for a 1 or 2 year contract before they know the salary or can they make that decision once they see the ruling?

Once they see the ruling they choose.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

For some reason I feel like Treliving has moved on and is working on his other contracts. His case on Kulak is sound, and Kulak doesn't have a living comparable to the figure he's asking for.

I suspect the arbitrators ruling will stand on this one. Does anyone know if the Flames have to opt for a 1 or 2 year contract before they know the salary or can they make that decision once they see the ruling?

Yeah, I think if they were going to work something out it would have been immediately after the hearing at the latest (like the Bouma deal a couple of years ago). Since the arbitrator could rule at any time now, I think that's what they're waiting for. Also, Treliving has 3 hearings in 4 days coming up (with Jankowski's written brief due tomorrow morning), so he has probably moved on.

The one or two year selection is part of the written briefs that are filed 48 hours before the hearing.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanTrev

Once they see the ruling they choose.

Originally Posted by getbak

The one or two year selection is part of the written briefs that are filed 48 hours before the hearing.

Which one of these is true?
Common sense is that they would pick after but getback usually knows what's up.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Which one of these is true?
Common sense is that they would pick after but getback usually knows what's up.

CBA Article 12.9.c

Election of Term

The party against whom a salary arbitration election was filed (i.e., the Club in Player-elected salary arbitration and the Player in Club-elected salary arbitration) shall elect in its brief whether the salary arbitration award shall be for a one or two-year SPC. Failure to make such an election shall be deemed to constitute an election for a one-year SPC.

[Wolfman]

I know it won't happen but can you cut ties witb a player during or after arbitration? You don't want to lose a player or asset for nothing but I am just curious.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

I know it won't happen but can you cut ties witb a player during or after arbitration? You don't want to lose a player or asset for nothing but I am just curious.

A team can walk away from an arbitration award if it's over a certain minimum amount. That amount increases with the salary cap, and is somewhere over $4 million this year.

Since Kulak won't be getting anywhere close to that much, the Flames won't be able to walk away from the award.

Whatever the arbitrator decides tomorrow, both the Flames and Kulak will have to live with it (unless the Flames trade him -- then his new team will have to live with it).

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by getbak

CBA Article 12.9.c

Getbak, et all
Are you aware of an online resource to arbitration awards, and players whom NHL teams walked from?

Did some searching to no avail. TIA

EDIT:
Found this
https://www.capfriendly.com/arbitration

[thymebalm]

So then my next question is can the other party use the term you filed for against you in the arbitration hearing?

I feel like you could argue that requesting a 2 year contract inherently increases the value of a player compared to a single year.

[PugnaciousIntern]

I feel like the 1 or 2 year decision will be mostly dependent on the contract being 1 or 2 way

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

I feel like the 1 or 2 year decision will be mostly dependent on the contract being 1 or 2 way

It’s funny when people don’t bother to read the thread and then chime in. The team had to request 1 or 2 years before the hearing. So what you “feel” is completely irrelevant.

[Willi Plett]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

So then my next question is can the other party use the term you filed for against you in the arbitration hearing?

I feel like you could argue that requesting a 2 year contract inherently increases the value of a player compared to a single year.

Yes, and that is generally a correct observation.

Isn’t 48 hours basically up? What time was the hearing?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Willi Plett

Yes, and that is generally a correct observation.

Isn’t 48 hours basically up? What time was the hearing?

I was thinking the same thing. This one is going the distance, I really dont get Kulak's thinking on this.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Trouba's was released at 1PM on Sunday. His arbitration hearing was on the Friday.