mll Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 18 minutes ago, E. Lindros said: Arbitration is for a pay raise correct? No offense to boucher but he was on waivers how many times last year? He should be happy with a 1 way deal. Its not an issue at all i just find it funny a guy who couldnt stick with multiple teams last year is filing for arbitration. He stands a good chance of being put on waivers to start year anyway He's probably looking for a one way-deal. Per CapFriendly his qualifying offer was 750K at the NHL level. He is on a two-way and would only earn 70K in the AHL. He hasn't met the requirements for his qualifying offer to be a one-way deal - the qualifying offer is set by the CBA based on his previous contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 25 minutes ago, mll said: Not playing hardball at all - they have barely started talking because the Wild have been busy with the draft, free agency etc. It's mostly to set a deadline by when the contract has to be finalised. His agent wasn't certain if they would file yesterday but Niederreiter did so it probably influenced him. For Niederreiter it's deadline related because last time it dragged on all summer. arbitration filings guarantee the player a one year contract and often a 2 year contract unless the team walks from a player which only happens if the player is a minor piece it's not really accurate to view it as hardball since aribtration ensure hardball tactics (freezing a player out) cannot occur Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 49 minutes ago, coastal.view said: arbitration filings guarantee the player a one year contract and often a 2 year contract unless the team walks from a player which only happens if the player is a minor piece it's not really accurate to view it as hardball since aribtration ensure hardball tactics (freezing a player out) cannot occur This was specifically about Granlund and how Minnesota values him - he's an important part of their future and they want to sign him long term. It's unlikely that it reaches arbitration in his case. Same as Niederreiter. btw a team can only walk away if the award is above a certain amount (last year it was around 3.8M) - any award under and they are bound to the decision. In the case of a player elected arbitration - it's the team that selects the length of the award pre-decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 1 minute ago, coastal.view said: arbitration filings guarantee the player a one year contract and often a 2 year contract unless the team walks from a player which only happens if the player is a minor piece it's not really accurate to view it as hardball since aribtration ensure hardball tactics (freezing a player out) cannot occur doesn't it often mean that the player/agent and the GM are pretty far apart though on salary? MGs agent clearly thinks his client can do better on salary than he can get from the GM, and that the agent things the GM isn't using market comparable player salaries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 1 minute ago, S'all Good Man said: doesn't it often mean that the player/agent and the GM are pretty far apart though on salary? MGs agent clearly thinks his client can do better on salary than he can get from the GM, and that the agent things the GM isn't using market comparable player salaries? Not when discussions haven't even started. In his case it's to set a deadline. Russo has a quote by his agent. “Mikael wants to be there from the first day of camp and wants the team to get a chance to play for the Cup. Potentially holding out is not his style,” Granlund’s agent Todd Diamond said. “Filing allows that to happen and gives both parties the opportunity to work out something with a longer term on an accelerated schedule." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said: doesn't it often mean that the player/agent and the GM are pretty far apart though on salary? MGs agent clearly thinks his client can do better on salary than he can get from the GM, and that the agent things the GM isn't using market comparable player salaries? it could mean that it could mean they ran out of time in negotiations and this step just ensure the player will get a contract and another month is available to get it done the bottom line is the arbitration eligible player who files knows he will have a contract for the upcoming season or if the team walks, he is an free agent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 45 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said: Guy just posted 70 pts..he'll get PAID. We need even younger. Little on the small side too? So Minny's got 17 guys, with about 15 mill open cap? These two guys(Gran & Neid) should take quite a chunk outa' that. They were so elated when they signed Parise/Suter(15 mill x forever)..wonder how they feel today? 34 minutes ago, qwijibo said: Most arbitration cases are solved well before the hearing. One positive for the team is once a player elects arbitration they can't sign an offer sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 1 hour ago, mll said: This was specifically about Granlund and how Minnesota values him - he's an important part of their future and they want to sign him long term. It's unlikely that it reaches arbitration in his case. Same as Niederreiter. btw a team can only walk away if the award is above a certain amount (last year it was around 3.8M) - any award under and they are bound to the decision. In the case of a player elected arbitration - it's the team that selects the length of the award pre-decision. ah thank you for that info on the award needing to be higher than a certain value i did not realize that i am aware team can only walk from 1 award every 2 years (or at least i think that is the term ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 Chaput.lol Correct me if I'm wrong, the Canucks can just walk away from the arbitrator decision or sign him to it. (Unless they foolishly resign him prior to the arbitration hearing) So Chaput might have punched his ticket out of Vancouver and possible the NHL. Does anyone know what he was qualified at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Juice Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 JG Pageau looking to get PAID for his playoff performance. Here's hoping Ferland asks for the max that he can get Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 It's an odd balance with Chaput/Boucher. I'm sure they saw all the recent signings and are doubting their position with the club, and therefore want one-ways. In all likelihood we'll be paying Megna full freight to play in the AHL, so I'm sure it's preferable to the Canucks to have the aforementioned two on two-way deals. These things usually end in a bump of their AHL pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B53 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 6 hours ago, mll said: This was specifically about Granlund and how Minnesota values him - he's an important part of their future and they want to sign him long term. It's unlikely that it reaches arbitration in his case. Same as Niederreiter. btw a team can only walk away if the award is above a certain amount (last year it was around 3.8M) - any award under and they are bound to the decision. In the case of a player elected arbitration - it's the team that selects the length of the award pre-decision. Hmm didnt know about that minimum dollar amount of approx 3.8M. That means all of those lesser players on the list have guarenteed themselves contracts for the upcoming season? Lets say for example that now JB doesnt want to bring back Chaput because he was able to get Burmistrov and all the other free agents he had targeted. Is there anyway for him to release Chaput, making him a free agent? Or has Chaput now guarenteed himself a contract for next year one way or another (whether its through arbitration or an agreement before the hearing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 1 hour ago, B53 said: Hmm didnt know about that minimum dollar amount of approx 3.8M. That means all of those lesser players on the list have guarenteed themselves contracts for the upcoming season? Lets say for example that now JB doesnt want to bring back Chaput because he was able to get Burmistrov and all the other free agents he had targeted. Is there anyway for him to release Chaput, making him a free agent? Or has Chaput now guarenteed himself a contract for next year one way or another (whether its through arbitration or an agreement before the hearing) If they wanted to get rid of him they could have opted to not tender a qualifying offer. Then he would have become an UFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 17 hours ago, B53 said: Hmm didnt know about that minimum dollar amount of approx 3.8M. That means all of those lesser players on the list have guarenteed themselves contracts for the upcoming season? Lets say for example that now JB doesnt want to bring back Chaput because he was able to get Burmistrov and all the other free agents he had targeted. Is there anyway for him to release Chaput, making him a free agent? Or has Chaput now guarenteed himself a contract for next year one way or another (whether its through arbitration or an agreement before the hearing) It's why there's a 2nd buyout window that opens up for teams with a player who has filed for arbitration (it doesn't have to go to the hearing) as they might have to clear cap space. It's more restrictive than during the regular buyout window - not everyone can be bought out. It's slightly different rules for the window to open up if it's team elected. Unlikely to happen here - if both parties agree they can mutually part ways. The player goes on unconditional waivers and then there is no more obligation on either side. Another way is to put the player on waivers and see if he gets claimed. Minnesota put Schroeder on waivers last year after he filed for arbitration. They were irate that he was asking for a one-way deal. No takers. It was also to help their case during the hearing - re why give him a one-way when no one claimed him. Nashville is using the same approach as the Wild and has put Mazanec on waivers today. Benning could do that too but he has to be willing to lose the player over waivers. Minimum amount for this year - from Friedman's 30 thoughts of 27 May: 28. [...] If a team wants to walk away from a salary arbitration decision, the threshold is $4,084,219. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattrek Posted July 9, 2017 Share Posted July 9, 2017 On 7/5/2017 at 3:37 PM, jono2009 said: Id love to see hutton traded. never truly been a fan. had a good rookie year and was pathetic last year You'll be eating your words this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salacious Crumb Posted July 9, 2017 Share Posted July 9, 2017 40 minutes ago, Mattrek said: You'll be eating your words this season. Smilin' Ben will be a fan fav like Snepsy or Juice one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted July 9, 2017 Share Posted July 9, 2017 Ferland could get a massive bump and mess with Calgary's CAP. Will be interesting to watch that one as Flames are very tight up against things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted July 10, 2017 Author Share Posted July 10, 2017 Tomas Tatar feels like his days in Detroit are numbered if his contract negotiations go to arbitration. “It’s just a mandatory contract,” Tatar said. “Unless I agree with Detroit, I’ll go to the court, where they’ll give me a year’s contract. That would probably be my last season in Detroit.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 First hearings start this Thursday with Tatar and Parayko. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 56 minutes ago, mll said: First hearings start this Thursday with Tatar and Parayko. Can't blame either player. STL would be dumb not to keep Parayko happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.