It's just craziness. Yeah you'e disappointed that your guy wants to leave to do something else but that happens. In all facets of life.
Now I'm sure his employment contract has a non-compete should he resign. Their efforts should be focused on enforcing that, or extracting some type of compensation in order to forgive it. vs. trying to publicly humiliate him.
It's not like Chayka is irreplaceable. He has shown to be an average GM at best.
I can't help but think that the rumour that the owners went over Chayka to try and negotiate an extension with Hall has a little part in all this. I've had bosses micromanage and it's annoying, especially when you see them making mistakes and can't do anything about it.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
It's not like Chayka is irreplaceable. He has shown to be an average GM at best.
I can't help but think that the rumour that the owners went over Chayka to try and negotiate an extension with Hall has a little part in all this. I've had bosses micromanage and it's annoying, especially when you see them making mistakes and can't do anything about it.
Pagnotta was just commenting about this on the radio. He thinks that Chayka had permission to talk to the Devils. Chayka didn't see a scenario where he would leave Arizona but then the Devils put an amazing offer in front of him. Arizona ownership felt NJ went beyond what they had permission to talk to Chayka about. Chayka decided he wanted out.
The thing that gets me is Chayka being willing to finish out the season and be with the team in Edmonton for as long as they're in it as long as there was some transition plan in place by which he would hand over the reigns to Sullivan on a set timeline. The Coyotes didn't want to talk about succession until the playoffs were over.
Call me crazy but a gradual succession plan that allows the GM to stay with the team and doesn't create this sideshow sounds like a pretty good option. I just don't understand why that wasn't a basis for compromise.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Pagnotta was just commenting about this on the radio. He thinks that Chayka had permission to talk to the Devils. Chayka didn't see a scenario where he would leave Arizona but then the Devils put an amazing offer in front of him. Arizona ownership felt NJ went beyond what they had permission to talk to Chayka about. Chayka decided he wanted out.
Ding ding ding.
The team believed that Chayka's intention was to build relationships around the league. Something he said that previous owners permitted him to do. Then he got the offer, got greedy and surprised the team with his intention to leave.
The team invested in him long term, which he accepted in November. He basically lied about the whole "Building relationship" angle from what I hear and wanted to be out east to begin with.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jordan! For This Useful Post:
The thing that gets me is Chayka being willing to finish out the season and be with the team in Edmonton for as long as they're in it as long as there was some transition plan in place by which he would hand over the reigns to Sullivan on a set timeline. The Coyotes didn't want to talk about succession until the playoffs were over.
Call me crazy but a gradual succession plan that allows the GM to stay with the team and doesn't create this sideshow sounds like a pretty good option. I just don't understand why that wasn't a basis for compromise.
Because he has a multi-year contract that the team wanted him to contractually honor.
And, if looking at it from the other side, who wouldn't take or even listen to a much better career opportunity out of respect for their current employer?
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
Why want an employee who doesn’t want to work for you any longer?
Why bother with a contract? If another organization is trying to snag an asset from you that you invest in.. wouldn't you want to be compensated in some manner? At least? or expect your asset to honor their end of the deal?
Why bother with a contract? If another organization is trying to snag an asset from you that you invest in.. wouldn't you want to be compensated in some manner? At least? or expect your asset to honor their end of the deal?
I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. I am pretty sure a lot of hockey op contracts have clauses that people can move on as long as it isn't a lateral move. I guess it will be up to Bettman to rule on if the new position is lateral or not. If it includes a tie in to the NFL or Premiere league then I don't see how it can be considered lateral.
The Following User Says Thank You to Robbob For This Useful Post:
