AppleJack Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 okay thanks guys. I get confused when it comes to this side of Hockey...Plus I was trying to tell my flames loving Friend what was going on and I was just confusing both of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Booth Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Good thing its only 2 yrs otherwise hed be spoiled too what a waste of extra 1 million or two Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHIPS Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 It is kind of funny that if Col didn't match, Flames would lose their 1st and 3rd round to Col BUT STILL HAVE TO put O'Reilly on waivers. Col is a divisional rival to the Flames, at with O'Reilly's overpaid contract, have every reason to do so. Saying the Flames dodged a bullet is an understatement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Ummm if you re-read what I originally wrote I was asking if Colorado hadn't matched Calgary's offer sheet and took the picks, and then Calgary had to waive him if Colorado couldn't just go out and claim him off of waivers since his original te am was Colorado. If this (and I think so from what you wrote) is true then why didn't colorado take those pics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I kind of explained it, but with different examples, and the O'Reilly situation is awkward because of the offer sheet. Colorado wouldn't have first rights to him if they didn't match and Calgary had to put him through waivers since, as Bookie mentioned, it was an offer sheet not waivers that started it all. Only if it were similar to the Volpatti and Sestito examples above would they get first shot if the team that claimed him off waivers wanted to put him on waivers again. If they had let him go and taken the picks, they would have had to hope the teams lower than Colorado in the standings didn't make a claim for them to have a chance to get him back. In other words, he wouldn't have made it past Columbus. O'Reilly isn't even waiver eligible under the normal waiver rules, but since he played overseas after the start of this season, any team other than Colorado (who held his rights) would have to put him through these special waivers if they submitted an offer sheet. It used to be any player without a contract that came over after playing in another league would have to clear these special waivers, but it was a new addition to this CBA that the team holding his rights would be exempt from the waivers. Lots of things to understand, but there are people who know what's going on here (thankfully due to all the explanation from people smarter than us usually!) so you'll probably find the answer if you read through the threads it applies to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Feaster should cruise our forums once in a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleJack Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I kind of explained it, but with different examples, and the O'Reilly situation is awkward because of the offer sheet. Colorado wouldn't have first rights to him if they didn't match and Calgary had to put him through waivers since, as Bookie mentioned, it was an offer sheet not waivers that started it all. Only if it were similar to the Volpatti and Sestito examples above would they get first shot if the team that claimed him off waivers wanted to put him on waivers again. If they had let him go and taken the picks, they would have had to hope the teams lower than Colorado in the standings didn't make a claim for them to have a chance to get him back. In other words, he wouldn't have made it past Columbus. O'Reilly isn't even waiver eligible under the normal waiver rules, but since he played overseas after the start of this season, any team other than Colorado (who held his rights) would have to put him through these special waivers if they submitted an offer sheet. It used to be any player without a contract that came over after playing in another league would have to clear these special waivers, but it was a new addition to this CBA that the team holding his rights would be exempt from the waivers. Lots of things to understand, but there are people who know what's going on here (thankfully due to all the explanation from people smarter than us usually!) so you'll probably find the answer if you read through the threads it applies to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Or just follow some of the same guys I do on Twitter. Wouldn't have helped him with the offer sheet mind you, since no one had mentioned that before the offer sheet was matched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Was this a new scenario that came about with the new CBA, or was this something that would have happened in the last one too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Was this a new scenario that came about with the new CBA, or was this something that would have happened in the last one too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Is that right? What is unclear is how the NHL deals with the aspect that the 3.5 he he was offered this year (1 + 2.5 sb) is for a 29 game season? Regardless, is the $6.5 million not is the salary that will have to be qualified (that is what has been reported), so this offersheet locked into a $6.5 million dollar cap hit - and/or another battle when he reaches RFA status next year. The point of getting the other team NOT to match obviously means paying a LOT more than the player is worth and persuading the team to accept picks as compensation - and who is more likely to step up with a gross overpayment than Feaster and the Flames? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 The more I think about it, the dumber this move was. The Avs looked like they were not gonna sign O'reilly this season, but because of the Flames offer sheet they had to. Now the Avs just got a whole lot better, and will be another team competing with the Flames for that final playoff spot. Dumb dumb dumb. The Flames really need to just blow it up and tank already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 It doesn't look like the Flames ownership will ever accept reality and bite the bullet to let Feaster to do a proper rebuild. And Feaster has admitted he didn't clarify the rules with the league office before tendering that offer sheet. What a disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 FLAMES CLAIM NO MISTAKE ON O’REILLY ZoomBookmarkSharePrintListenTranslate CALGARY • Calgary Flames general manager Jay Feaster says the team performed due diligence before signing Colorado forward Ryan O’Reilly to an offer sheet. The Flames released a statement Friday afternoon after Rogers Sportsnet reported that O’Reilly would have been placed on waivers if the Avalanche hadn’t matched Calgary’s offer sheet. Had the deal played out that way, the Flames would have lost a first- and thirdround draft pick and O’Reilly, who would have likely been snapped up by another team. That would have been an unacceptable result for any team, but particularly devastating to an aging Flames squad struggling to get into the Western Conference playoff picture. According to the NHL’s collective agreement, O’Reilly would have had to clear waivers because he played two games in Russia’s KHL after the start of the NHL season. But Feaster said in a statement that the team did its research before drafting the offer sheet for O’Reilly, who led Colorado in scoring with 55 points last season. “Prior to tendering the offer sheet for Ryan O’Reilly we, as a hockey operations department, examined whether there were any impediments to our successfully securing the services of the player including, but not limited to, his having played in the KHL after the start of the current NHL season,” Feaster said. At issue is Article 13.23 of the collective bargaining agreement, which states that a professional or former professional player that played in a league outside North America after the start of the NHL regular season must clear waivers before playing in the NHL that same season. An amendment to that article was made in the latest agreement, allowing teams resigning their own restricted free agents to avoid the waiver process, which means Colorado won’t risk losing O’Reilly by matching the offer sheet. There doesn’t appear to be any protection for a team signing a free agent from another club, but Feaster said in the statement that the Flames’ interpretation of Article 13.23 “was, and continues to be, different than the NHL’s current interpretation.” The NHL declined to clarify whether O’Reilly would have had to clear waivers. “We agree with the Flames in the sense that the entire issue has become an academic point,” NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said in an email to The Canadian Press. “Ryan O’Reilly has signed a contract with the Colorado Avalanche and the contract has been registered. We have nothing further to say on the subject.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Article rank2 Mar 2013Winnipeg Free Press— The Canadian Press Flames’ GM Feaster insists he isn’t a bonehead ZoomBookmarkSharePrintListenTranslate Says club didn’t botch O’reilly offer sheet CALGARY — Calgary Flames general manager Jay Feaster says the team performed due diligence before signing Colorado forward Ryan O’Reilly to an offer sheet. Waivers The Flames released a statement Friday afternoon after Rogers Sportsnet reported that O’Reilly would have been placed on waivers if the Avalanche hadn’t matched Calgary’s offer sheet. Had the deal played out that way, the Flames would have lost a first- and third-round draft pick and O’Reilly, who would have likely been snapped up by another team. That would have been an unacceptable result for any team, but particularly devastating to an aging Flames squad struggling to get into the Western Conference playoff picture. According to the NHL’s collective agreement, O’Reilly would have had to clear waivers because he played two games in Russia’s KHL after the start of the NHL season. But Feaster said in a statement that the team did its research before drafting the offer sheet for O’Reilly, who led Colorado in scoring with 55 points last season. “Prior to tendering the offer sheet for Ryan O’Reilly we, as a hockey operations department, examined whether there were any impediments to our successfully securing the services of the player including, but not limited to, his having played in the KHL after the start of the current NHL season,” Feaster said. At issue is Article 13.23 of the collective bargaining agreement, which states that a professional or former professional player that played in a league outside North America after the start of the NHL regular season must clear waivers before playing in the NHL that same season. An amendment to that article was made in the latest agreement, allowing teams re-signing their own restricted free agents to avoid the waiver process, which means Colorado won’t risk losing O’Reilly by matching the offer sheet. There doesn’t appear to be any protection for a team signing a free agent from another club, but Feaster said in the statement that the Flames’ interpretation of Article 13.23 “was, and continues to be, different than the NHL’s current interpretation.” He also said that the prospect of losing two high draft picks as well as O’Reilly himself is now a moot point since Colorado matched the offer sheet. The NHL declined to clarify whether O’Reilly would have had to clear waivers if the Avalanche refused to match Calgary’s offer sheet. “We agree with the Flames in the sense that the entire issue has become an academic point,” NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said in an email to The Canadian Press. “Ryan O’Reilly has signed a contract with the Colorado Avalanche and the contract has been registered. We have nothing further to say on the subject.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Fatigue Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Feaster.... what a maroon..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqua59 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 One thing fans of the Flames must be thinking. There's no question Flames management wants to win, it's just blunders like last weeks blunder makes one wonder if they even have the slightest clue on how to produce a winning club? This is a group that is waiting to rebuild. Another astute hockey move. Doesn't matter what direction they go this club is still in big trouble, no better than when Sutter was fired. What a joke of a hockey club. Mean while Edmonton is shaping itself into a power house. I'm sure glad I'm a Vancouver fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.