Question on Tampering ... ? ... Perhaps

[Rocket-68]

If I was GM of the Canucks and went to Bo and Luke saying, "we are going to trade you for kings ransom and when July 1st hits, will sign you back for $X ..."

 

Would making this type of promise or commitment land me and the Canucks in hot water? I wondered if this would be considered "tampering". 

 

Any thoughts?

[timberz21]

Technically, not tampering, but this never happens for multiple reasons.   I think it would be unethical and probably illegal if a written agreement was made and postdated to July 1st. 

 

So this kind of deal would need to be a verbal contract.  But that opens up another bag of problems:

 

- What if they get hurt;

- What if they suck real bad after the trade

- What if the player actually likes his new home and changes his minds.

- What if the team makes a trade and no longer requires those players.

 

I don't think the Team, the agent and the player would want to officially enter into this kind of agreement since no one knows what the future holds.  Can a team back out of such a deal? can a player?  Verbal agreement are bindings so that could open a shitload of legal problems IMO

 

So can teams say that we're not closing the door for a reunion of course, but you will never find such a binding agreement beforehand IMO.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 10, 2022 by timberz21

[King Heffy]

Verbal agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

19 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Verbal agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on.

Parol evidence rule.

 

I learned my lawyering from watching all the episodes of Mattlock.

 

Edited December 10, 2022 by NewbieCanuckFan

[nuckin_futz]

I believe this would be collusion. At any rate you can't enforce a contract to do something illegal.

 

If you hire me to "fix" the brakes on your wife's car and I don't do it, you can't sue me for breach of contract. I suppose you could try but it would be mighty stupid.

[mll]

It's tampering with free agency.  This is the segment on circumvention in the CBA - can lead to fines counting against the cap and/or the loss of draft picks. 

 

No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.

 

[goalie13]

It would totally be tampering.

 

Once you trade the player to another team, they will be under contract to that team.  You cannot have a side deal with a player under contract to another team.

[kanucks25]

It's obviously illegal but you can still do it, just don't put anything on paper, of course.

 

Tkachuk did it with the Blues, I'm sure it's happened several other times.

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

It's obviously illegal but you can still do it, just don't put anything on paper, of course.

 

Tkachuk did it with the Blues, I'm sure it's happened several other times.

Allvin appears pretty kept together.  JR on the other hand .. maybe he'd go there who knows.   I'm sure it's happened before too.   Big time players like Bo seems a little unlikely.    Could see a conversation like this happens though "look we are going to trade you, but would like to keep open communication with your agent this summer"   

 

That innocuous enough for a player like Schenn.   Bo they'd have to be awfully careful in how they word it but a subtle hint ..:' you bet it's happened and will happen again.

 

JR already has said he'd like to re-sign Bo, and at the same time said if they can't, the better he plays the better the return.   Makes a lot of sense to anyone, including Bo.   He's been told he's either going to sign with us or be traded.   Sure they can try and sign him again in the summer,  and it will be a big tell if he goes to a contender as a pure rental, or an up and coming team that has a way better chance of making the cap work.    A contender likely can't. And the return for Brock is better for the team if he goes to a middling team as well.  

 

 

Edit:  As for Bo he's a big key to our future either way.   I'd love to see him re-sign with us and it aligns well JRs comments saying he'd like to see players on the same lines long term.    Like we had with the Sedins and Burrows.   Miller-Horvat?   Kuzmo EP Mikheyev/Brock ? 

 

We have the parts for the top six sorted as is but it's going to be fluid until Horvat is dealt with.   Signed or dealt.    And it will be a huge indication as to what management intends to do.   Won't be surprised to see using either Brock or Garland as the currency to boost this.   And trading a first absolutely should be on the table if we decide to double triple down on this core.    Glad Demko's out.   It's 100% on the players to make this work with the coaching staff.    Our record despite letting in a lot of goals, is improving. 

 

Edited December 10, 2022 by IBatch

[Alflives]

If Bo thinks he’s worth more than the Landeskog contract (so he’s not extended before the TDL) then we MUST trade him.  It matter not what other teams are suggesting he’s worth.  But, when he is on the market and other teams are making offers, the team that believes Bo is a 9 million dollar player might greatly overpay to get him so they can extend him before free agency.  

[IBatch]

9 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If Bo thinks he’s worth more than the Landeskog contract (so he’s not extended before the TDL) then we MUST trade him.  It matter not what other teams are suggesting he’s worth.  But, when he is on the market and other teams are making offers, the team that believes Bo is a 9 million dollar player might greatly overpay to get him so they can extend him before free agency.  

Absolutely.   But it likely only happens this way if he's traded to a team much like ours.   As in a team that's entering their peak prime years (as far as age is concerned) and needs a big boost.   The market for Bo is massive really.    I'd take our own division off the table, but practically any team, even ARI, would be interested in him.   Likely 22-24 teams.    Would be a lot to deal with from a trade perspective,  sure that they'd put a higher metric on the Eastern as well.   Bet St. Louis would be in on it. If it came down to an extra second...would you want to trade him to the Central instead of the East?    That would be a tough call.   

Edited December 10, 2022 by IBatch

[IBatch]

10 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If Bo thinks he’s worth more than the Landeskog contract (so he’s not extended before the TDL) then we MUST trade him.  It matter not what other teams are suggesting he’s worth.  But, when he is on the market and other teams are making offers, the team that believes Bo is a 9 million dollar player might greatly overpay to get him so they can extend him before free agency.  

Bo's contract won't be signed during covid and flat cap in mind.   Likely even with us his next deal now starts with an 8.     Pretty sure Landeskog is well into his contract now.   He's also a great comp so good on picking him as an example.   Horvat being a goal scoring center and his body of work to date ... well he's got a 20 goal baseline through the duration of his next deal anywhere.   And probably that's low.    Like Naslund and the Sedins, he's coming into his own right at the same age.   Naslund rattled off 3 40 plus goal seasons in a row, as a winger, Horvat appears to be ready to do the same thing and good for him!   Doubt he picks a team that isn't either up and coming, or that makes room for him now to go for a cup.  TO is always looking to make a splash.  Same with NYR ....' MTL is another possible, same with OTT. 

[Alflives]

51 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Bo's contract won't be signed during covid and flat cap in mind.   Likely even with us his next deal now starts with an 8.     Pretty sure Landeskog is well into his contract now.   He's also a great comp so good on picking him as an example.   Horvat being a goal scoring center and his body of work to date ... well he's got a 20 goal baseline through the duration of his next deal anywhere.   And probably that's low.    Like Naslund and the Sedins, he's coming into his own right at the same age.   Naslund rattled off 3 40 plus goal seasons in a row, as a winger, Horvat appears to be ready to do the same thing and good for him!   Doubt he picks a team that isn't either up and coming, or that makes room for him now to go for a cup.  TO is always looking to make a splash.  Same with NYR ....' MTL is another possible, same with OTT. 

Yup.  From our point of view though I just want the best return for us, regardless of where we move him.   Bo will likely, after he’s traded, go to July 1 and test the market.  Then he will pick his team.  So he could end up in Seattle (doubtful) or a team out west.  Considering he picks his club as a UFA I’m expecting we will trade him where the return is best.  It’s too bad Bo seems unwilling to accept a fair deal (7 7.5 x 8 years) to stay with us.  Maybe him and his wife (two kids now, right?) want to raise their children closer to where they grew up?  

[IBatch]

9 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Yup.  From our point of view though I just want the best return for us, regardless of where we move him.   Bo will likely, after he’s traded, go to July 1 and test the market.  Then he will pick his team.  So he could end up in Seattle (doubtful) or a team out west.  Considering he picks his club as a UFA I’m expecting we will trade him where the return is best.  It’s too bad Bo seems unwilling to accept a fair deal (7 7.5 x 8 years) to stay with us.  Maybe him and his wife (two kids now, right?) want to raise their children closer to where they grew up?  

You bet.   Best return either way signed or traded.   Seattle is a real possibility as far as getting an offer goes.   Hope if he doesn't sign with us, he at least isn't in our own division.   Tanev kind blew big time and Bo as a squid wouldn't be cool. 

[Down by the River]

Regarding tampering, the other day Frank Seravalli put it out there that a team was willing to offer Bo 9 million. I don't know how that isn't tampering. You're basically using the media to indirectly begin contract negotiations. 

[ToTellTheTruth]

10 hours ago, mll said:

It's tampering with free agency.  This is the segment on circumvention in the CBA - can lead to fines counting against the cap and/or the loss of draft picks. 

 

No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.

 

That sounds like they cannot discuss possible trades with other clubs or free agents like Kuzmenko either.

 

BUT

 

Negotiating for the next contract and then changing their mind is allowed. That negotiated part can be a reference later after FA starts. The league cannot make a FA player move or ban them from negotiating with all teams.

 

A Schenn/Kuzmenko deal could be all but concluded but it falls through as the team fails and changes direction. Then after the draft or gaining cap space the players agent already has a deal in hand.

 

If they trade Schenn/Kuzmenko and then they give him the best offer even if there is no back room deal, maybe he wants to live here. 

 

Agents can do lots of things GM's can't, they can be go be tweens lurking in the shadows, they are not hindered by too many CBA rules and as most final negotiations are done by lawyers there is the client/lawyer protections.

[Provost]

On 12/9/2022 at 6:04 PM, Rocket-68 said:

If I was GM of the Canucks and went to Bo and Luke saying, "we are going to trade you for kings ransom and when July 1st hits, will sign you back for $X ..."

 

Would making this type of promise or commitment land me and the Canucks in hot water? I wondered if this would be considered "tampering". 

 

Any thoughts?

The player is under contract with you so there is no tampering.  You can have all sorts of conversations with the player until they aren’t under contract with you.

 

You can do exactly what you suggest without explicitly saying it that way.

 

Hey, we would be happy to extend you and here is the range of salary and term we are comfortable with.  Oh, if you are OK with it, we could also trade you to someone for another shot at a Cup if you want.  Come and talk with us if you hit free agency and we would love you back.

 

It also wouldn’t likely fall under circumvention as that would have to prove an intent to circumvent the cap.  Signing a player in free agency isn’t attempting to circumvent the cap.  That spoke be sometime more like signing a guy for an under market 1 year deal because of a cap crunch and promising to “make it up” the year after when they have more cap available.

Edited December 12, 2022 by Provost

[cuporbust]

On 12/9/2022 at 6:04 PM, Rocket-68 said:

If I was GM of the Canucks and went to Bo and Luke saying, "we are going to trade you for kings ransom and when July 1st hits, will sign you back for $X ..."

 

Would making this type of promise or commitment land me and the Canucks in hot water? I wondered if this would be considered "tampering". 

 

Any thoughts?

No. Tampering is influencing a player from another team that's not permitted to negotiate with other teams,  that you intend to sign , trade , or aquire him in any way. This would have absolutely nothing to do with tampering . 

[justathought]

back in the day it was standard operating practice with the oilers and smith