Should Feaster get fired over the O'Reilly offersheet fiasco - Page 20 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Flash Walken · 03-01-2013, 12:50 PM

Avs were reportedly asking for a Roster player, a 1st and a second for O'Reilly.

If I am Avs GM, I go straight to Jarmo and say, "We will let you claim O'reilly on Waivers if you trade us Dubinsky+ for ______(underpayment)."

Avs walk away with Dubinsky, top 5 pick and a third rounder for O'Reilly which has got to be near the value they were asking via trade.

omelete · 03-01-2013, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

I'm not so sure. I think Colorado gets first dibs on the player they lost on waivers.

They wouldn't be losing him to waivers, they'd lose him to the offer sheet.

valo403 · 03-01-2013, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blankall

They had his RFA rights. However, when the Avs matched the offer sheet, he ceased to be an RFA in the exact same way he would have ceased to be an RFA for the Flames (should you chose that interpretation). If the NHL is going to take that position, they should now apply it to the Avs.

Daly is acting totally inappropriately in making statements to the press about an unresolved legal issue. Flames management should consider a law suit. Daly is no way the be all and end all in interpreting this document. He's one of several parties invovled. He has no more authority to interpret the document than Feaster does.

Completely agreed. Honestly the reason I asked for a source earlier (which was idiotic seeing as it was in the OP that I didn't read thoroughly) was that I couldn't believe Daly would make a definitive statement on something that has a pretty large ambiguity in it. Unless there are further documents that clarify the interpretation of that clause I could easily see an arbitrator (I'd imagine that's who would hear any argument) siding with either interpretation.

Mazrim · 03-01-2013, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ped

Don't know whether anyone deserves to get fired, but if anyone does Sherman should be at the top of the list.

Alienates a good young player nothing, ends up having to pay him more then the guy wants, and rushed to match.

Obviously no one knew this was coming, but if Sherman had been a little more patient...

If Sherman knew about this waiver thing, he could have used it to strengthen Colorado's bargaining position and forced O'Reilly to take less, no?

return to the red · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

Does the division re-alignment have the avs in Calgary's division?

If so, if nothing has been signed then from an Avs standpoint I wouldn't match and screw a divisional opponent for potentially years

Erick Estrada · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dammage79

Man if sherman flipped the decision......all hell would break loose league wide.

They would look almost as bad as the Flames coming out one day saying they matched and always wanted him back only to turn around and take the picks if for nothing more than to screw another team.

Parallex · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

I don't think you understand the point of that expression.

The point of that expression is that you get no credit for almost hitting your target in any endeavor outside of the game of horseshoes and the act of throwing grenades... in this case I'm using it to mean that almost committing a move that makes a negative impact is not the same as actually making a negative impact.

opendoor · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

I'm not so sure. I think Colorado gets first dibs on the player they lost on waivers.

They wouldn't be losing him on waivers. They'd have lost him to an offer sheet.

getbak · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

I'm not so sure. I think Colorado gets first dibs on the player they lost on waivers.

They wouldn't be losing him on waivers. They'd be losing him due to an RFA signing.

Pierre "Monster" McGuire · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

So I'm not the only one who wants them to not match now just to see the carnage?

Haha no, I think you're on your own on that one. I'm a die-hard Flames fan, so I don't want to see any more carnage.

Murph · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

CLARIFICATION PLEASE - If the Avs haven't filed the paperwork and take the compensation, who gets first dibs on O'Reilly's rights when he goes on waivers? His former team or the bottom team in the standings?

JurassicTunga12 · 03-01-2013, 12:51 PM

What is this talk that Avs haven't officially matched?

trackercowe · 03-01-2013, 12:52 PM

The Flames have become the best dark comedy in sports today. It's gone past the point where I truly give a crap since things only seem to get worse.

And yes Feaster should be fired, he wasn't a good hire to begin with, and the last 24 hours have given even more credence as to why the guy is clueless. Let him go back to ending up on OTR talking to Landsberg every few days as that is where he truly belongs.

Robo · 03-01-2013, 12:52 PM

Brilliant move by feaster did this to take the focus off the on ice performance .....

Calgary4LIfe · 03-01-2013, 12:52 PM

I think Feaster will survive this, but that rope is getting short. That would have been a huge blunder and an embarrassment to the organization. The Gilmour trade and the Phaneuff trade would have nothing on this - a bad trade is still better than what would have happened.

I would bet the Flames start quietly shopping around for a new GM.

Seems the organization as a whole fails to do their due diligence. Feaster didn't do his before sending over that offer-sheet yesterday. Management didn't do their due diligence when they hired Feaster right off the bat, instead of listening to differing opinions and plans.

This should wake up the organization. I hated Feaster when he took over - especially the way he took over. Gave him the benefit of the doubt, and he did some good things. This, however, I think is inexcusable. Everyone who makes a big mistake a work expects to get terminated. This is no different.

Cortez · 03-01-2013, 12:52 PM

Can someone claify for me- I'm confused.

Does Colorado have first priority on waiver claim if the paperwork hasn't been filed yet?

Please let your answer be no

Bonded · 03-01-2013, 12:52 PM

Oh man, if the Avs haven't actually matched, we are so screwed. I really hope they did.

dino7c · 03-01-2013, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Avs were reportedly asking for a Roster player, a 1st and a second for O'Reilly.

If I am Avs GM, I go straight to Jarmo and say, "We will let you claim O'reilly on Waivers if you trade us Dubinsky+ for ______(underpayment)."

Avs walk away with Dubinsky, top 5 pick and a third rounder for O'Reilly which has got to be near the value they were asking via trade.

you cant do that

polak · 03-01-2013, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre "Monster" McGuire

Haha no, I think you're on your own on that one. I'm a die-hard Flames fan, so I don't want to see any more carnage.

I'm a die-hard fan too but oh man... can you imagine the fallout?

This could be the spark for a complete, massive dismantling of the team.

oldschoolcalgary · 03-01-2013, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

Completely agreed. Honestly the reason I asked for a source earlier (which was idiotic seeing as it was in the OP that I didn't read thoroughly) was that I couldn't believe Daly would make a definitive statement on something that has a pretty large ambiguity in it. Unless there are further documents that clarify the interpretation of that clause I could easily see an arbitrator (I'd imagine that's who would hear any argument) siding with either interpretation.

wasn't Daly a part of the NHL negotiating team that put together the CBA in the first place? and if so, it would seem like his interpretation would take precedent over some anonymous lawyer...