[News] Flames offersheet O'Reilly UPDATE: Avs match

[Enoch Root]

The fact that the Avs, O'Reilly's agent, and (it sounds like) other teams were also unaware of this issue does not AT ALL excuse Feaster and the Flames organization.

I will wait until I here some official statements from the league, but if it does turn out that the Flames ****ed this up, there are no pardons, no excuses - heads HAVE to roll.

[Trojan97]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The fact that the Avs, O'Reilly's agent, and (it sounds like) other teams were also unaware of this issue does not AT ALL excuse Feaster and the Flames organization.

I will wait until I here some official statements from the league, but if it does turn out that the Flames ****ed this up, there are no pardons, no excuses - heads HAVE to roll.

The scariest thing to me is how Feaster claims he knew that the language in the CBA suggested that O'Reilly would have to go through waivers and yet was still willing to fight the NHL re: the interpretation of this rule while risking the loss of picks/player for nothing.

He either had no idea or he was completely reckless in managing his assets. I can empathize if he had come out and said he screwed up. The press release simply infuriates me and degrades my opinion of him as a capable leader of this team.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Trojan97

The scariest thing to me is how Feaster claims he knew that the language in the CBA suggested that O'Reilly would have to go through waivers and yet was still willing to fight the NHL re: the interpretation of this rule while risking the loss of picks/player for nothing.

He either had no idea or he was completely reckless in managing his assets. I can empathize if he had come out and said he screwed up. The press release simply infuriates me and degrades my opinion of him as a capable leader of this team.

I agree that the press release is insulting. More evidence that condemns KK, IMO.

[MrMastodonFarm]

How easy would it have been for the Flames to call up the league and get clarification?

Mind bottling.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

How easy would it have been for the Flames to call up the league and get clarification?

Mind bottling.

It was brought up by Neil Smith on the radio this afternoon that you don't want to tell bill daly you're going to offer sheet RoR, but im wondering, why on earth would daly tell Colorado? Isn't that outside the scope of his responsibility?

Stupid, lazy, reckless... If there's one thing this organization has proven itself to be in the last three years, it's shockingly irresponsible. So look for an Iginla extension in the next few weeks, or for him to walk July 1. But don't think this team is going to do the responsible thing, because that's not how they roll.

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

How easy would it have been for the Flames to call up the league and get clarification?

Pretty logical question. I think Feaster was hoping people wouldn't ask questions and get caught up in all of his fancy and unnecessarily excess legal language.

I think he would have actually looked better saying they didn't know. Instead, by trying to save face and saying they knew of this potential issue, it looked like they just didn't do diligence on it.

Either way, completely and totally inept.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by calgARI

Pretty logical question. I think Feaster was hoping people wouldn't ask questions and get caught up in all of his fancy and unnecessarily excess legal language.

I think he would have actually looked better saying they didn't know. Instead, by trying to save face and saying they knew of this potential issue, it looked like they just didn't do diligence on it.

Either way, completely and totally inept.

Yeah, the obvious answer is, he didn't know about it and is just covering his tracks. Its not lazyness, it was a mistake and he's covering his tracks. Kind of annoyed... he's better off saying he didn't know about the rule, its a honest mistake which could be forgivable. Lying though... god I hate hate.

[bluejays]

The funny thing is, the reporter who first broke the story deserves a lot of credit from Flames fans for not reporting this yesterday even though he (presumably) knew about it last night. It would have really screwed the Flames for some time as you could virtually guarantee the Avs would let him walk and take a good 1st and 3rd to shove it in the Flames faces. Thank goodness they were quick to jump the gun.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Can we change the poll options now?

Avs match, keep O'Reilly and the Flames get embarrassed.

Avs don't match, take the picks and the Flames fall victim to



Should bingo be fired?

Fixed...

[FlamesPuck12]

Originally Posted by fleury

The funny thing is, the reporter who first broke the story deserves a lot of credit from Flames fans for not reporting this yesterday even though he (presumably) knew about it last night. It would have really screwed the Flames for some time as you could virtually guarantee the Avs would let him walk and take a good 1st and 3rd to shove it in the Flames faces. Thank goodness they were quick to jump the gun.

Why would Avs let him walk just to shove it in Flames faces. They still lose ROR and gain 1st, 3rd round pick regardless of which team RoR ends up on.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

Why would Avs let him walk just to shove it in Flames faces. They still lose ROR and gain 1st, 3rd round pick regardless of which team RoR ends up on.

Unless I'm mistaken, they don't/wouldn't get the 1st and 3rd by matching the offer sheet.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

Why would Avs let him walk just to shove it in Flames faces. They still lose ROR and gain 1st, 3rd round pick regardless of which team RoR ends up on.

They took the deal, and get their player, but had to pay more than anticipated. From the quotes about it being the Flames perogative to make the offer sheet, they weren't too happy about the Flames doing business that way. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it seemed they weren't too happy at the least, because it forced their hand.

If they knew about the waiver clause, I think they'd say so long to O'Reilly, take the Flames 1st and 3rd, which hurts the Flames because they wouldn't be able to get the guy, as he'd be picked up on waivers, for nothing by another team. You don't see this scenario as sticking it to the Flames while also helping their own interests by getting picks back? I'm inclined to believe part of the reason they matched the offer sheet was to keep him away from a division rival. This would have been a bigger F-U to the organization, where they could have basically said, if you want to do business a little dirty, we can play that game as well.

[FlamesPuck12]

Originally Posted by fleury

They took the deal, and get their player, but had to pay more than anticipated. From the quotes about it being the Flames perogative to make the offer sheet, they weren't too happy about the Flames doing business that way. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it seemed they weren't too happy at the least, because it forced their hand.

If they knew about the waiver clause, I think they'd say so long to O'Reilly, take the Flames 1st and 3rd, which hurts the Flames because they wouldn't be able to get the guy, as he'd be picked up on waivers, for nothing by another team. You don't see this scenario as sticking it to the Flames while also helping their own interests by getting picks back? I'm inclined to believe part of the reason they matched the offer sheet was to keep him away from a division rival. This would have been a bigger F-U to the organization, where they could have basically said, if you want to do business a little dirty, we can play that game as well.

Division rival or not, the GM should do what's best for their club, not what's worse for one of the four division rivals. Avs obviously thought that they would rather have ROR instead of the 1st and 3rd. I don't think they would've said "lets take the worse deal (1st/3rd instead of ROR) so we can stick it to the Flames."

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

Division rival or not, the GM should do what's best for their club, not what's worse for one of the four division rivals. Avs obviously thought that they would rather have ROR instead of the 1st and 3rd. I don't think they would've said "lets take the worse deal (1st/3rd instead of ROR) so we can stick it to the Flames."

Maybe not so, but the Avs would have got better with the 1st and 3rd and the Flames worse off without O'Reilly or their 1st and 3rd. You can't deny that O'Reilly going to a division rival (especially through this manner), played a role in them accepting it. If the Avs had knowledge of the waiver process, the Flames get nothing, and the Avs get the pick. The player likely moves outside the division which would be much easier to swallow.

[Jackson21]

All in all, we're incredibly lucky that the Avs weren't aware of the CBA provision. Had they been, they would have had Feaster over a barrel and could have offered the following:

To Colorado: Flames' 2013 1st round pick

To Calgary: Avs' 2013 3rd round pick with the assurance that the Avs match the offersheet (maybe an AHL scrub thrown in to save Feaster a tiny bit of face).

The Flames come away with a bit more than if the Avs don't match and O'Reilly simply goes on waivers, but still crippling.

Huge bullet dodged.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by J epworth kendal

It's not a technicality. It's a massive mistake. Maybe it wasn't Feaster's job to comb through the new CBA for stuff like this, but whoever's job it was, they need to be fired. If Feaster didn't have someone looking for technicalities like this, Feaster needs to be fired.

Ken Holland says he doesn't have access to the full the text of the CBA. That would make reading it awful tough.

Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland stressed that it's tricky to negotiate the new CBA without teams having all the details down on paper to study. "Obviously, right now it's a different time because there's a CBA in place," Holland told TSN.

"We haven't really got the book. We've got the memorandum of understanding, but you'd like to get the book, the CBA and read through it."

Still, though, he believed Feaster and the Flames properly braced themselves for the offer-sheet.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=417108

[bluejays]

I'm not buying Holland's explaination. I think he's classier than Gillis, and he's trying to help out Feaster from getting roasted. They may not have the book, but if the media can get their hands on a document, why couldn't any GM? How could he say Feaster properly braced the Flames for the worst when they never consulted with the NHL offices before the offer was put out? Holland's being a nice guy, nothing much else to read into it.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by fleury

They may not have the book, but if the media can get their hands on a document, why couldn't any GM?

I don't think the media have the full text either. They just came up with the correct interpretation, while Feaster got it wrong (and from the wording of the memorandum of understanding, I'd side with Feaster too).

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by SebC

I don't think the media have the full text either. They just came up with the correct interpretation, while Feaster got it wrong (and from the wording of the memorandum of understanding, I'd side with Feaster too).

But Holland also said that you can call the league and get clarification on any vague statements in the MOU. In that case, there is no excuse.

[trew]

Does anyone know if we could have signed O'Reilly without calling him up until next season? If so, would he then be subject to waivers?

Just wondering if the worst case scenario was not having him play until next season.