Should Feaster get fired over the O'Reilly offersheet fiasco

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by sven

I thought that Calgary presented an offer sheet which ROR SIGNED taking him off the market as an RFA (AVs being the only team having the right to match)
So wouldn't he no longer be an RFA the moment he signed Calgary's contract?

He certainly wasn't an active player either. Given that Colorado still had matching rights for a week and he didn't have an activated NHL contract, I would consider him to be an RFA at that moment still. A RFA in transition, but still an RFA.

[sven]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

Except that this is wrong. I mean, yes, you would talk to them to get the context, but basing your determination of the proper interpretation of the contract on what the parties tell you they think it means doesn't settle the issue. You HAVE to make an independent judgment on what the clause means. Blankall's interpretation of the wording in this instance is batcrap crazy, but he's right about one thing: what Bill Daly says he thinks the rule means is not the final word.

In this case, there are two possible interpretations. 1. the phrase "a club's RFA list" refers to the club that holds the RFA rights originally, and does not apply where another club offer sheets that player, because the club tendering the offer sheet does not have the player on their RFA list. 2. the phrase "a club's RFA list" means ANY club's RFA list, in which case the club tendering the offer sheet gets the benefit of the exemption and the Flames would've got him without going through waivers.

I tend to think Daly (and everyone else, seemingly) is correct and interpretation 1 is right. But it's not at all a slam dunk, and if the issue was a live one, likely would be contested before whatever decision-making body has jurisdiction of the issue (be it an arbitrator or a court).

With that said, here is my question: has it been confirmed yet that the Avalanche HAVE filed the required paperwork with the league to match? Or could they still hold out and bend the Flames over a table?

I have yet to hear a confirmation either way which is a scary thought.
Imagine an angry GM that has all sorts of leverage over Feaster.

Like I said, first thing I would do is work out a deal with Columbus and trade a 3rd rounder (and leaving ROR on waivers for Columbus to claim) to Columbus for Anisiminov, Dubinsky, Foligno or Brassard and a 2nd
They then collect the Flames 1st round (top 5 pick) and a 3rd round pick.

They get a solid roster player and in the deep 2013 draft, they will have
Flames 1st round pick, Avs 1st round, Avs 2nd round, Columbus 2nd round, Flames 3rd round

Gross...

[HELPNEEDED]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Since King supposedly runs the hockey operations should this not fall at his feet as well?

IF, a big if, things had gone worse then they have now and the Flames wanted to pursue litigation against members of the organization guilty of misdoing it would have to be King and not Feaster.

I may be wrong, but thats what I believe is true.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Confirmed, Ryan O'Reilly has officially signed with the Colorado Avalanche.

Well this isn't quite what I'm getting at... The only signing that occurred by ROR was the signing of the offer sheet. The Avs then have to file paperwork with the league. I'm asking if they've done that yet.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Since King supposedly runs the hockey operations should this not fall at his feet as well?

Do you think Edwards would fire him? I sure don't.

The more that i think about it, nobody will lose their job on this. Maybe at the end of the season Feaster is let go but that will be do to not making the playoffs or getting Iggy re-signed. From their they will look for another GM that will work with upper management on the new "win now" mandate. Same result as old result.

[Yamer]

I have to agree with everything Duhatschek said this afternoon. Feaster doesn't deserve to go, but he and his staff should have conferred with the NHL instead of taking such an enormous risk.

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by HELPNEEDED

IF, a big if, things had gone worse then they have now and the Flames wanted to pursue litigation against members of the organization guilty of misdoing it would have to be King and not Feaster.

I may be wrong, but thats what I believe is true.

I say we fire Gelinas and put the blame on him. Someone has to be a scapegoat

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

So the CBA is an agreement between the NHL and the NHLPA. They are the only two signatories to the agreement. Jay Feaster and his band of advisers do not consult either the NHL or the NHLPA for their interpretation of this clause. They make their own independent interpretation of the clause without consulting either party to the agreement. That is unbelievable.

If I had a client who was looking at buying a corporation that had one major contract and there was an ambiguous clause as between the corporation and another party in that major contract, and I made my own independent judgment on what the clause meant, I would be fired on the spot. The logical thing to do would be to contact one or both parties to get their interpretation of the ambiguous clause, but sadly the Flames do not do what any competent legal counsel would do. Unbelievable.

We give legal advice all the time on these sorts of things. The view of the parties to the contract is largely irrelevant as of course they are going to offer an interpretation favourable to their position.

[MissTeeks]

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In case anyone was wondering, Ryan O'Reilly has taken his medical with COL and signed his contract with the Avalanche

[FlameFan21]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In case anyone was wondering, Ryan O'Reilly has taken his medical with COL and signed his contract with the Avalanche

Thank Christ...

[blankall]

Originally Posted by opendoor

At the time of his SPC coming into effect he was on Colorado's Reserve List and RFA List but not Calgary's. That's the distinction.

The CBA provision mentions absolutely nothing about "at the time of an SPC coming into effect". I agree there is a distinction, but not one dealt with in the CBA.\

In fact, the CBA suggests the exact opposite:

All Players on a Club’s Reserve List and Restricted Free Agent List will be exempt from the application of CBA 13.23 Waivers in the case of a mid-season signing.

For further clarity, if Club A trades such a Player to Club B and Club B signs the Player to an SPC, such Player will be exempt from the application of CBA 13.23.

Obviously, we're dealing with an offer sheet and not a trade here. The distinction is that the the player is not an RFA for the new team in the case of the offer sheet. However, if the NHL is going to apply that distinction, they need to apply it consistently and apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly has been signed to an offer sheet by Colorado. According to Daly's interpretation he ceased to be an RFA, and must now pass through waivers.

Daly is the one misinterpreting things here. It's pretty clear. Once again, Daly is no more of an authority on the correct interpretation than any one of us. If Daly is going to keep with his interpretation, he must apply it evenly. O'Reilly needs to pass through waivers. Columbus, Florida, and the Islanders cannot afford to pay his salary next year of 6.5 million. Washington and Buffalo cannot afford to fit it under their cap structure.

If Daly is goign to open his mouth about this, the following needs to be enforced immediately:

1) O'Reilly ceases to be an RFA and is placed on waivers.

2) Calgary the first team in line that can afford O'Reilly's contract claims him, while giving up nothing.

3) Colorado then sues the NHL, finds out Daly's interpretation is totally wrong. They can't go after the Flames, as they are innocent party who merely acquired a player off waivers. They get some kind of recourse against the NHL (money or additional picks). Whatever it's not really a concern to the Flames.

QED

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

Well this isn't quite what I'm getting at... The only signing that occurred by ROR was the signing of the offer sheet. The Avs then have to file paperwork with the league. I'm asking if they've done that yet.

Yes, the Colorado Avalanche have filed the Right of First Refusal with the league, and the Avalanche and O'Reilly have BOTH signed a 2-year, $10M contract.

[St. Pats]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In case anyone was wondering, Ryan O'Reilly has taken his medical with COL and signed his contract with the Avalanche

Good now we only have to worry about his next blunder!!!

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In case anyone was wondering, Ryan O'Reilly has taken his medical with COL and signed his contract with the Avalanche

Phew!

[calumniate]

Him saying that it's just academic now that the Avs matched is not much of a defense. However I don't think there's much more he can say, other than he got really really lucky.

[sven]

Originally Posted by blankall

The CBA provision mentions absolutely nothing about "at the time of an SPC coming into effect". I agree there is a distinction, but not one dealt with in the CBA.\

In fact, the CBA suggests the exact opposite:

Obviously, we're dealing with an offer sheet and not a trade here. The distinction is that the the player is not an RFA for the new team in the case of the offer sheet. However, if the NHL is going to apply that distinction, they need to apply it consistently and apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly has been signed to an offer sheet by Colorado. According to Daly's interpretation he ceased to be an RFA, and must now pass through waivers.

Daly is the one misinterpreting things here. It's pretty clear. Once again, Daly is no more of an authority on the correct interpretation than any one of us. If Daly is going to keep with his interpretation, he must apply it evenly. O'Reilly needs to pass through waivers. Columbus, Florida, and the Islanders cannot afford to pay his salary next year of 6.5 million. Washington and Buffalo cannot afford to fit it under their cap structure.

If Daly is goign to open his mouth about this, the following needs to be enforced immediately:

1) O'Reilly ceases to be an RFA and is placed on waivers.

2) Calgary the first team in line that can afford O'Reilly's contract claims him, while giving up nothing.

3) Colorado then sues the NHL, finds out Daly's interpretation is totally wrong. They can't go after the Flames, as they are innocent party who merely acquired a player off waivers. They get some kind of recourse against the NHL (money or additional picks). Whatever it's not really a concern to the Flames.

QED

Dude, thats ridonk...

Thank God AVs matched.

We just dodged a bullet folks

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by calumniate

Him saying that it's just academic now that the Avs matched is not much of a defense. However I don't think there's much more he can say, other than he got really really lucky.

I was just wondering what would Darryl do in this case...

"Get lost. I got nothing to say to you."

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In case anyone was wondering, Ryan O'Reilly has taken his medical with COL and signed his contract with the Avalanche

Glad that's over with. Back to looking at mock drafts instead of lists that include the 4th round.

I'm thinking one of Shinkaruk or Domi (based on the past few years) Maybe Lindholm or Lazar depending on how optimistic you are about the season. I like Cammarata for the third or fourth round.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by blankall

The CBA provision mentions absolutely nothing about "at the time of an SPC coming into effect". I agree there is a distinction, but not one dealt with in the CBA.\

In fact, the CBA suggests the exact opposite:

Obviously, we're dealing with an offer sheet and not a trade here. The distinction is that the the player is not an RFA for the new team in the case of the offer sheet. However, if the NHL is going to apply that distinction, they need to apply it consistently and apply it to Colorado. O'Reilly has been signed to an offer sheet by Colorado. According to Daly's interpretation he ceased to be an RFA, and must now pass through waivers.

Daly is the one misinterpreting things here. It's pretty clear. Once again, Daly is no more of an authority on the correct interpretation than any one of us. If Daly is going to keep with his interpretation, he must apply it evenly. O'Reilly needs to pass through waivers. Columbus, Florida, and the Islanders cannot afford to pay his salary next year of 6.5 million. Washington and Buffalo cannot afford to fit it under their cap structure.

If Daly is goign to open his mouth about this, the following needs to be enforced immediately:

1) O'Reilly ceases to be an RFA and is placed on waivers.

2) Calgary the first team in line that can afford O'Reilly's contract claims him, while giving up nothing.

3) Colorado then sues the NHL, finds out Daly's interpretation is totally wrong. They can't go after the Flames, as they are innocent party who merely acquired a player off waivers. They get some kind of recourse against the NHL (money or additional picks). Whatever it's not really a concern to the Flames.

QED

Yeah, I'm sure that's how it'll play out.

Are you seriously arguing that rules about signing RFAs aren't applicable because once they're signed they're no longer RFAs? OK...

[blankall]

Originally Posted by sven

Dude, thats ridonk...

Thank God AVs matched.

We just dodged a bullet folks

No it's not "ridonk". Daly is taking a slavish interpretation of the CBA. He should apply that interpretation consistently and fairly.