[News] UPD: Berglund on waivers to terminate contract. Gives up ~$12.5 million.

[corporatejay]

Do you guys realize that this is a human being not a robot or a piece of meat. He doesn't want to play in buffalo, he shouldn't have to. He's made 25 million USD in his life, if he's not happy then why should he play out his contract, to make some anonymous hockey fans happy. Get real.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Split98

Yeah, I'm always a big fan of people that think for themselves only and do whatever the hell they want too.

More of that please!

hockey ultimately is a job

you're compensated for your time

if you dont like your job, you can quit, thats your right. the typical incentive not to quit a job you dislike is continued payment for your services so you can keep paying bills. this guy can pay his bills and doesnt like his job, so he quit

good on him

[Split98]

Lol, you guys make it seem like they asked him to clean the toilets. I'm all for people standing up for themselves, but this is very much a part of the job description NHL players willingly sign up for. You'll play for the team that owns your rights, plain and simple.

He was traded to another NHL team and he could have submitted the list of teams he didn't want to go to, but he failed to do that.

Let's not pretend that Berglund is making an ethical stance.

[Scroopy Noopers]

I would think after Paul Ranger shared his story people would be more hesitant to jump to: “doesn’t he know how lucky he is!?”

There are several reasons a player could make such a huge financial decision. And we don’t know the reason here.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I would think after Paul Ranger shared his story people would be more hesitant to jump to: “doesn’t he know how lucky he is!?”

There are several reasons a player could make such a huge financial decision. And we don’t know the reason here.

And I'll change my tone the second we hear a story like that - I'm ok with being wrong!

But right now, it seems pretty clear that he didn't like being traded to Buffalo.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

They would just probably put him back on waivers to terminate again.

It is a moot situation really. Don't think any team has claimed someone off unconditional waivers.

I think Edmonton claimed a goalie once. Niko Hovinen?

[stone hands]

does he have to be cleaning toilets to not be happy with his job?

he literally has zero obligation to anyone if he forfeits his salary

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Split98

And I'll change my tone the second we hear a story like that - I'm ok with being wrong!

But right now, it seems pretty clear that he didn't like being traded to Buffalo.

The individuals personal life > whatever you expect of a stranger (who is paid to entertain you.)

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Split98

Lol, you guys make it seem like they asked him to clean the toilets. I'm all for people standing up for themselves, but this is very much a part of the job description NHL players willingly sign up for. You'll play for the team that owns your rights, plain and simple.

He was traded to another NHL team and he could have submitted the list of teams he didn't want to go to, but he failed to do that.

Let's not pretend that Berglund is making an ethical stance.

I'm not pretending that. Armstrong isn't a "huge jerk", he did what was best for the blues, Berglund is doing what's best for Berglund.


Re: Bolded. Agree, and he's deciding that he doesn't want to be an NHL player anymore.

[Beninho]

I didn’t know they could terminate a contract like that, does it not count against Buffalos cap?

[Snuffleupagus]

Jeez, couldn't he have come up with a mysterious rash, bad back or something? that's a lot of scratch to walk away from

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Beninho

I didn’t know they could terminate a contract like that, does it not count against Buffalos cap?

Once the contract is terminated it won't count against the cap.

Teams can terminate contracts for breach or for mutual termination.

Some are reporting this as mutual termination meaning the player and the team both agree to terminate the contract. It is rare for a contract with this much value left to get terminated because players usually don't want to walk away from this much money or at least try to force a buyout where they can still get most of the value back.

The Sabres are also in the right to terminate the contract for breach. Failure to report to the team is clear breach of contract. However, in the case of failure to report they have to give the player reasonable time to report after suspending them otherwise it gives the NHLPA a strong grounds to file a grievance.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

I'm not pretending that. Armstrong isn't a "huge jerk", he did what was best for the blues, Berglund is doing what's best for Berglund.


Re: Bolded. Agree, and he's deciding that he doesn't want to be an NHL player anymore.

Sure, and he's more than welcome do to so.

But to pull the rug so early into your new tenure with a team is pretty crappy, and I think he's scummy for doing it. If there's more to this I'll eat my words, but it'll be odd that whatever he's dug in on happened after he was traded. If it's just that he doesn't like Buffalo... I think that should always be looked at as pretty crappy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing that he doesn't do what he wants (nor am I going to pretend that the league doesn't abuse their players as well... as we learned with Ranger). I'm saying "good riddance". I don't think many are going to make time for a guy who quit the NHL because he didn't like the city he was traded to. I don't think that someone signing a contract should be doing so without intentions of playing through it, no matter what team or line you're playing on. I like millionaires that show up every day to earn their contract - and play for the logo on the front, not the name on the back.

I hate the precedent actions like this set for the rest of the players in the NHL, and I would never want a player like that near a team I cheer for.

[The Cobra]

I wouldn't be so quick to blame the agent, as we have no idea whether Berglund co-operated and perhaps failed to supply the list to his agent when requested,

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Split98

Sure, and he's more than welcome do to so.

But to pull the rug so early into your new tenure with a team is pretty crappy, and I think he's scummy for doing it. If there's more to this I'll eat my words, but it'll be odd that whatever he's dug in on happened after he was traded. If it's just that he doesn't like Buffalo... I think that should always be looked at as pretty crappy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing that he doesn't do what he wants (nor am I going to pretend that the league doesn't abuse their players as well... as we learned with Ranger). I'm saying "good riddance". I don't think many are going to make time for a guy who quit the NHL because he didn't like the city he was traded to. I don't think that someone signing a contract should be doing so without intentions of playing through it, no matter what team or line you're playing on. I like millionaires that show up every day to earn their contract - and play for the logo on the front, not the name on the back.

I hate the precedent actions like this set for the rest of the players in the NHL, and I would never want a player like that near a team I cheer for.

There is no precedent here. No one can be forced to work for someone or somewhere they don't want to. In return for making that choice, he has chosen to give up the money he would have received under that contract.


He's not asking to be paid still. The basic concept of any employment is you agree to perform tasks in exchange for money. He's saying I don't want to do that anymore. Which is his right.

[cam_wmh]

I almost regret asking this, curiosity has got me , but we do know what his personal/home life was like in St Louis? Separation/Divorce, where his children are in his former city? Similar to the Maroon scenario?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Once the contract is terminated it won't count against the cap.

Teams can terminate contracts for breach or for mutual termination.

Some are reporting this as mutual termination meaning the player and the team both agree to terminate the contract. It is rare for a contract with this much value left to get terminated because players usually don't want to walk away from this much money or at least try to force a buyout where they can still get most of the value back.

The Sabres are also in the right to terminate the contract for breach. Failure to report to the team is clear breach of contract. However, in the case of failure to report they have to give the player reasonable time to report after suspending them otherwise it gives the NHLPA a strong grounds to file a grievance.

Can a team sue a player for breaching a contract?

[Split98]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

There is no precedent here. No one can be forced to work for someone or somewhere they don't want to. In return for making that choice, he has chosen to give up the money he would have received under that contract.


He's not asking to be paid still. The basic concept of any employment is you agree to perform tasks in exchange for money. He's saying I don't want to do that anymore. Which is his right.

I think where my opinion splits from everyone else, is I do not see professional athletes as a group that shares the same working conditions as 99% of us out there. What we're all talking about is very important, and I fully agree.

However, this isn't an electrician who was transferred without any consent across the country at a moment's notice. He is playing in the same National league, is supported by the same Players Association, and I have yet to hear of any dangerous or unethical practices the Buffalo Sabres asked him to perform that the St. Louis Blues did not. He signed a contract to play hockey, was compensated immensely for his services and threw in the towel when he didn't get what he wanted. I'm not seeing much else here, and I'm fairly surprised a player who refuses to play for a team he was traded to has such support. This isn't some labour dispute... it's a player who seemingly only plays for teams he likes.

As well, if this was a player who was traded to the Sabres, contributed to the team as he did for St. Louis, and Buffalo treated him like garbage in return... we have a different story. But it's still only December, so this narrative doesn't seem to diverge too much from "I don't want to play for Buffalo". Which is garbage. Let's also not forget that he had a very simple option of submitting the teams he was obligated to submit... and he didn't.

Family is also very important. A lot of people never become pro athletes due to the travel and distance from your family. Maroon, for example, signed contract in St. Louis to be with his family. He would have a lot of support from myself if he simply walked away from the game when his contract ended.


So again... "good riddance".
He can do what he wants - but I think he's pretty scummy for it.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Can a team sue a player for breaching a contract?

Generally, a court will not force a person who signs a personal service contract from fulfilling the terms of that contract (that is, they won't require specific performance).

In same cases the aggrieved party may be able to sue for damages, or prevent the party who walked away from providing those services elsewhere.

[Muffins]

Please correct me if i'm wrong here, but after the contract is terminated, couldn't he "theoretically" sign with another team for more money?