Should Feaster get fired over the O'Reilly offersheet fiasco

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

?

They did admit it was a mistake. The just said they interpreted the rule differently.

Thus, it was a mistake in the end.

From what I interpret, they basically said that the two sides have their own interpretations and that no one side is wrong.

[J epworth]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

Rayan O Rayli played 2 games in the KHL....obvious subterfuge IMO....player and his agent are the Dbags.

Feaster isn't my fav by any means but the whole thing stinks from the player's side IMO.

This is his name in Cryllic

Райан О Райли

Which, when translated back into english, which is what is done on the KHL site, his name is Rayan O Rayli. He was that name for all the games he played, pretty easy to figure out, not deceptive at all.

[SuperMatt18]

I think that Feaster and the NHLPA had looked into this but still not good enough for me...way too big of a risk for a team to take with a first round pick.

[Split98]

There's 30 pages here, and so far I haven't seen anyone give Feaster the benefit of the doubt.

We were all confused about his $1M salary this year with the $2.5M signing bonus and salary ramping up next year. How is no one considering that part of the agreement with ROR was that he stayed in the A this year and played up next year? (And sorry if I missed someone else bringing this up)

Seems pretty likely. A $1M salary (he won't receive anyway) has a low cap impact for the team, and the $2.5M compensates what he would have made this year playing for the Flames if there wasn't this waivers issue.

IMO, Feaster knew all about it, and ROR was perfectly happy to skip this season and join the Flames next season.

[M*A*S*H 4077]

Teams ask the league for clarification for on ice rules fairly regularly. But they can't be bothered to ask about a new rule in the rulebook in regards to contracts?

[Vedder]

Can we at least take the Flames statement as confirmation that the Avs have officially matched?

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

If you are not sure would you not at least check with the league first? Honestly I'm no lawyer but reading the article it looks pretty clear to me that the league is right and if the Flames interpreted things their way then the organization is in bigger trouble than we thought.

I agree...though, in their current explanation, true or not, they asked the NHLPA, not the NHL itself. Why they didn't head to the league, if true, is beyond me.

[sven]

Keep Spinning Feaster...

I only have a university education and even I could understand the CBA rules the way NHL sees it. That's why they changed the provision in the new CBA to exmpt the AVs from putting him through waivers or else the exmption would not be needed.

Can someone clarify how Feaster read the CBA? because the way I see it, there's only ONE way to understand it.???

[polak]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Unbelievable that they aren't going they are going to brush this off as no harm, no foul ...

Really, is anyone suprised.

This is the same team that has stuck with this crap core for the last 10 years.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by dino7c

so they Avs are going to take the 1st and 3rd and let him go to Columbus

1. Has Colorado submitted paperwork matching the offer sheet? (sounds like no).
2. Does Sherman's remarks last night have any bearing on Colorado's obligation to match now? (Likely not).
3. If Colorado decides to play hardball what are their options:

A. Continue with original plan and match offer sheet;
B. Tell Feaster he's boned and unless he tosses in a favorable asset on top of what's already on the table, Colorado may consider other options;
C. Let ROR walk, take the picks as is and let ROR be claimed.

4. Seems to me the big question that helps determine 3(B) and 3(C) is whether Colorado is first in line for the waiver wire line. I assume not as they aren't losing ROR to a waiver claim but rather to a offer sheet. Therefore, they won't be able to have their cake and eat it too (refuse to match, take the picks then put a claim in on ROR).

If Daly's interpretation is correct (and for the record, I think Blankall raises some very good points), Sherman could squeeze Feaster a lot (add Brodie or I'll refuse to match and you'll end up with nothing), but his bluff will be pretty transparent. If Feaster says no, Sherman wasnt willing to lose ROR for 2 picks before he knew the rule, he won't be willing to do it now just to screw Feaster.

[Cortez]

Hypothetical: If we were in last place and Colorado didn't match, could the flames have claimed him? Or would we be ruled out because we put in the original offer sheet?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Schultzie

If I'm hearing correctly that Colorado has yet to officially submit the paperwork necessary to match the deal, this is going to get all kinds of hilarious.

Where are you getting this? The only official thing I have heard on that subject is from the Flames who state that the offer sheet was matched. Why would they release that statement unless they knew the Av's had signed off? Sounds like a rumour to me to try and stir the pot.

[ComixZone]

That release is unacceptable.

This organization is indefensible.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Diemenz

So the long and short of this is that all RFAs that played in europe are pretty much "unoffersheetable" because of a loophole in the CBA. This loophole of course happened because of a lockout in which a new CBA was being drafted. Personally if the was a clause in the CBA that prevented me from signing an offer sheet which is my right as a player because I couldn't play hockey in NA due to the lockout I would have my lawyers having a field day.

This rule has existed for 8.5 years, except under the old CBA you couldn't even sign your own RFAs after they'd played in another league once the NHL season started. Remember the Radulov situation last year? The only reason he got out of clearing waivers was because the Predators argued that his existing contract was in effect and they weren't re-signing him.

[PeteMoss]

Honestly... the clause isn't clear. They would have gone to arbitration or whatever to get clarification.

But it wasn't a slamdunk win (obviously), so would they also have expected to get the offer sheet voided if they lost? You'd think you'd go for clarification prior to risking it.

[polak]

Originally Posted by sven

Keep Spinning Feaster...

I only have a university education and even I could understand the CBA rules the way NHL sees it. That's why they changed the provision in the new CBA to exmpt the AVs from putting him through waivers or else the exmption would not be needed.

Can someone clarify how Feaster read the CBA? because the way I see it, there's only ONE way to understand it.???

Oh Blankall would love too.
He sees it as a magical loophole in which the Avs could not keep ROR after the Flames signed him to an offer sheet. It was either waivers or the flames.

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by Split98

There's 30 pages here, and so far I haven't seen anyone give Feaster the benefit of the doubt.

That should tell you something.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Cortez

Hypothetical: If we were in last place and Colorado didn't match, could the flames have claimed him? Or would we be ruled out because we put in the original offer sheet?

I'm pretty sure a team who waives a player can't re-claim him. At least, I've never seen it happen.

[jlh2640]

It was a stupid technicality ! I honestly cant blame him as I am sure most other GMs didnt know either.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Split98

There's 30 pages here, and so far I haven't seen anyone give Feaster the benefit of the doubt.

We were all confused about his $1M salary this year with the $2.5M signing bonus and salary ramping up next year. How is no one considering that part of the agreement with ROR was that he stayed in the A this year and played up next year? (And sorry if I missed someone else bringing this up)

Seems pretty likely. A $1M salary (he won't receive anyway) has a low cap impact for the team, and the $2.5M compensates what he would have made this year playing for the Flames if there wasn't this waivers issue.

IMO, Feaster knew all about it, and ROR was perfectly happy to skip this season and join the Flames next season.

It's been mentioned several times but the Flames cannot do this. They have to put him on waivers right away and cannot try and hide him (suspension namely).