Wiznewski Arbitration

Looks like Wiz has gone for arbitration, so he looks to be holding out for more, maybe this is what is holding up all other transactions within the team??



http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=433509

Looks like Wiz has gone for arbitration, so he looks to be holding out for more, maybe this is what is holding up all other transactions within the team??



http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=433509

Him going to arbitration doesn't necessarily mean he is holding out for more money. It just means if that he and the team can't come to an agreement, he will go to arbitration and sign a one year deal.

People forget it has been what 5 days of free agency? Be patient. Things will get done. Murray himself said in the paper he was going to be patient and see what deals are out there and what situations unfold.

well no, it could also be the team making the decision

I have every faith in Murray, so far so good. as before in Burke we trust, in Murray we trust!!

at least theres no more risk for offer sheet. worst case scenario we get Wiz on a one year deal.

For some reason, I don't think we will keep him.

I've had this feeling that he wants more than Murray is willing to pay.

I'm not a salary guy so I don't know who to compare him to salary wise but I think Murray has some sort of plan in place and the signing IS holding things up as far as getting someone else on board.

The difference between say 2.5 and 3.5 million "could" keep another player from signing here because the difference of what they want is that million.

Make sense to anyone but me?

well no, it could also be the team making the decision

Wizniewski elected for salary arbitration according to the NHLPA website (http://www.nhlpa.com/MediaReleases/ReleaseDetails.asp?mediaReleaseDisplayId={3A76B9AA-E3F7-42CC-BCB3-A3BC01F99577})

TORONTO (July 5, 2009) – The following players have elected Salary Arbitration

and Mirtle (http://www.fromtherink.com/2009/7/5/939109/twenty-elect-for-salary-arbitration)

Here's a look at the 20 players who filed for salary arbitration by the deadline on Sunday

I believe the team can also elect for the deal to be a two year contract

Seems to me Murph is really trying to get players signed as cheap as possible. Looking at the contracts he's given out, Brown's contract near league minimum, Christensen not qualified in order to sign him cheaper, being very cautious in the UFA market, i wouldn't be surprised if he has offered Wis something beginning with 1, instead of the 2.5 we've been speculating.

Let's hope it's just a deadline to get a deal done. I don't like arbitration itself. It seems to ruin the relationship between the team and player, and I've generally found the decisions to be a little high.

Wisniewski is less of a point-getter and oft-injured, so that might help. Points didn't help us much with Vishnevski though.

The key questions is of course if it gets to arbitration. A lot of these deals are signed before they go into the hearing. It's a negotiating move at this point and the mere fact he filed doesn't necessarily mean that the hearing is the only outcome. I would expect contact to continue between the two parties leading up to the hearing, but in any case, this guarantees he'll be signed and ready to go by the time training camp swings around.

Seems to me Murph is really trying to get players signed as cheap as possible. Looking at the contracts he's given out, Brown's contract near league minimum, Christensen not qualified in order to sign him cheaper, being very cautious in the UFA market, i wouldn't be surprised if he has offered Wis something beginning with 1, instead of the 2.5 we've been speculating.

If its something like 1.5 million I think I wouldnt be too happy too, I'd be quite happy if we signedhiim with2-2.5

so does him electing to go to arbitration mean he wants to stay in Anaheim? I don't exactly understand if it's a choice a player or a team makes.

For some reason, I don't think we will keep him.

I've had this feeling that he wants more than Murray is willing to pay.

I'm not a salary guy so I don't know who to compare him to salary wise but I think Murray has some sort of plan in place and the signing IS holding things up as far as getting someone else on board.

The difference between say 2.5 and 3.5 million "could" keep another player from signing here because the difference of what they want is that million.

Make sense to anyone but me?

Thing is it's up to the arbitrator to decide. Wiz could say he's worth 7 mil but that doesn't mean the guy has to agree with him and award that. If anything this is the best route to get the fair amount for Wisniewski. Problem is both sides have to bash one another to get their point across and that's never good.

But I seriously doubt he'd be awarded something outrageous that Murray would walk away from. Anything upwards to 3 mil is fine by me. Hopefully they can come to an agreement before hand but the main thing is Wiz will be under contract with us for next season.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/gloves-come-off-during-arbitration/article701005/

Interesting read about Shaone Morrisonn's arbitration hearing last year. Of the 15 players who filed last year, only two actually went to hearing.

In Morrisonn's case, he's not unlike Wisniewski. They are the same age entering into arbitration, but Morrisonn has more experience, whereas Wisniewski has put up more points.

The talk about comparables is interesting. Looking around the league, guys like Brent Seabrook (3.5mil), Steve Eminger (1 mil and RFA), Trevor Daley (2.3mil), Willie Mitchell (3.5mil) and Chris Phillips (3.5mil) could all be brought up if you look at points and time on ice. Maybe even guys like Paul Mara (3mil last season).

Wisniewski's lack of experience could work in his favour or not, while the fact he hasn't player more then 68 games in a season will be a mark against him.

Thing is it's up to the arbitrator to decide. Wiz could say he's worth 7 mil but that doesn't mean the guy has to agree with him and award that. If anything this is the best route to get the fair amount for Wisniewski. Problem is both sides have to bash one another to get their point across and that's never good.

But I seriously doubt he'd be awarded something outrageous that Murray would walk away from. Anything upwards to 3 mil is fine by me. Hopefully they can come to an agreement before hand but the main thing is Wiz will be under contract with us for next season.

I don't think he will get awarded anything above 3 Million personally, but he could be asking for 4 million and Murray is saying no way.

That difference in amounts (to me) is what is holding up other moves by Murray. Purely speculation on my part to say the least.

And you are correct, bashing each other to make yourself look better than the other just bites for both sides. Even if the Ducks absolutely love the guy, it comes across as if they don't.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/gloves-come-off-during-arbitration/article701005/

Interesting read about Shaone Morrisonn's arbitration hearing last year. Of the 15 players who filed last year, only two actually went to hearing.

In Morrisonn's case, he's not unlike Wisniewski. They are the same age entering into arbitration, but Morrisonn has more experience, whereas Wisniewski has put up more points.

The talk about comparables is interesting. Looking around the league, guys like Brent Seabrook (3.5mil), Steve Eminger (1 mil and RFA), Trevor Daley (2.3mil), Willie Mitchell (3.5mil) and Chris Phillips (3.5mil) could all be brought up if you look at points and time on ice. Maybe even guys like Paul Mara (3mil last season).

Wisniewski's lack of experience could work in his favour or not, while the fact he hasn't player more then 68 games in a season will be a mark against him.

Lets hope it's not like this:
New York Islanders goaltender Tommy Salo had the most infamous hearing in the summer of 1997. Salo, the Islanders' starting goaltender at the time, left the proceedings in tears after being ripped by general manager Mike Milbury in what was called "the most horrific character assassination ever seen in an arbitration."

I don't see how you could award Wiz more than 2.5 million.

I don't see how you could award Wiz more than 2.5 million.

That's the kicker with all of this.
It doesn't have as much to do with the magic number you see in your head as it does with what the actual market is paying for a player with Wisniewski's skillset.

In fact, here's how Wisniewski will be awarded more than 2.5 million/year. A defenseman who can put up 25-30 points, play 20 minutes a night, while seeing equal time on the powerplay and penalty kill (about 2 minutes/game in each case) has a particular value in the league.

Which is why I threw out the names of some guys who could be brought up as comparables in the arbitration hearing. Others could include Philippe Boucher (2.5mil), Craig Rivet (3.5mil), Derek Morris (3.95mil), Mike Van Ryn (3.2mil) and Randy Jones (2.5mil).

I think it could be fair to speculate that Anaheim will be aiming for 2.5 with comparables being guys like Daley and Jones, whereas Wisniewski's camp will enter looking for 3.5 with comparables like Phillips and Mitchell. Ideally, the end result will be something along the lines of Van Ryn (who has a 2.9 million cap hit).

In fact, Van Ryn might be a great middle-ground comparable for Wisniewski. He's been injured regularly, sees time in all situations for Toronto (and in the past for Florida), comparable point output (Van Ryn has a career ppg of .365 while Wisniewski's is .362). Van Ryn is 30 and thus has been in the league longer (averaging 44 games/season compared to Wisniewski's 46.25 games/season).

Last season, Van Ryn posted a .407 ppg, averaged 19:37 in ice time with an average of 2:22 coming on the powerplay and 1:53 coming on the penalty-kill. He averaged .48 hits/game and 1.6 blocked shots/game and 1.96 shots/game.

In comparison, Wisniewski posted a .500 ppg (playing on two significantly stronger offensive teams), averages 19:51 in ice time with an average of 2:01 coming on the powerplay and 2:16 coming on the penalty-kill. He averaged 1.875 hits/game and 1.25 blocked shots/game and 1.85 shots/game.

Given all this, I would expect any contract to be larger then 2.5 million a year and likely closer to 3 million if not larger. That's how arbitration works and Wisniewski's camp has excellent examples to lay out what sort of player he is and how much he can reasonably expect to be paid. If they don't win outright, (or if it doesn't go to the hearing), I still expect the new contract to be at 3 million, if not higher.

That's the kicker with all of this.
It doesn't have as much to do with the magic number you see in your head as it does with what the actual market is paying for a player with Wisniewski's skillset.

In fact, here's how Wisniewski will be awarded more than 2.5 million/year. A defenseman who can put up 25-30 points, play 20 minutes a night, while seeing equal time on the powerplay and penalty kill (about 2 minutes/game in each case) has a particular value in the league.

Which is why I threw out the names of some guys who could be brought up as comparables in the arbitration hearing. Others could include Philippe Boucher (2.5mil), Craig Rivet (3.5mil), Derek Morris (3.95mil), Mike Van Ryn (3.2mil) and Randy Jones (2.5mil).

I think it could be fair to speculate that Anaheim will be aiming for 2.5 with comparables being guys like Daley and Jones, whereas Wisniewski's camp will enter looking for 3.5 with comparables like Phillips and Mitchell. Ideally, the end result will be something along the lines of Van Ryn (who has a 2.9 million cap hit).

In fact, Van Ryn might be a great middle-ground comparable for Wisniewski. He's been injured regularly, sees time in all situations for Toronto (and in the past for Florida), comparable point output (Van Ryn has a career ppg of .365 while Wisniewski's is .362). Van Ryn is 30 and thus has been in the league longer (averaging 44 games/season compared to Wisniewski's 46.25 games/season).

Last season, Van Ryn posted a .407 ppg, averaged 19:37 in ice time with an average of 2:22 coming on the powerplay and 1:53 coming on the penalty-kill. He averaged .48 hits/game and 1.6 blocked shots/game and 1.96 shots/game.

In comparison, Wisniewski posted a .500 ppg (playing on two significantly stronger offensive teams), averages 19:51 in ice time with an average of 2:01 coming on the powerplay and 2:16 coming on the penalty-kill. He averaged 1.875 hits/game and 1.25 blocked shots/game and 1.85 shots/game.

Given all this, I would expect any contract to be larger then 2.5 million a year and likely closer to 3 million if not larger. That's how arbitration works and Wisniewski's camp has excellent examples to lay out what sort of player he is and how much he can reasonably expect to be paid. If they don't win outright, (or if it doesn't go to the hearing), I still expect the new contract to be at 3 million, if not higher.

Except those contracts were given to impending UFAs, for the most part, in other offseasons and were based on not wanting to lose them and their body of work during other seasons. I could be wrong, but I don't believe any of those contracts can be used for much comparison. Shane O'Brien just signed a contract worth $1.6 million, and while they're not that comparable, it's probably as close as one can get this offseason. Lukas Krajicek is another guy who can be used for comparison, and he signed for less than $1.5 million.

Except those contracts were given to impending UFAs, for the most part, in other offseasons and were based on not wanting to lose them and their body of work during other seasons. I could be wrong, but I don't believe any of those contracts can be used for much comparison. Shane O'Brien just signed a contract worth $1.6 million, and while they're not that comparable, it's probably as close as one can get this offseason. Lukas Krajicek is another guy who can be used for comparison, and he signed for less than $1.5 million.

While you might be right about the impending UFA part, players like Gleason, Tyutin and Tallinder (all brought up in the Morrisonn hearing in 2007) were signed to deals in other offseasons (specifically 2006 in the case of all three).

If it's only guys who are the same age (have stayed RFA), Seabrook, Daley and Eminger still apply. In addition, perhaps guys like Denis Grebeshkov (RFA who made 1.5mil last season) and Mark Stuart (1.3mil) could apply.

As stotch mentioned, comparables have to be RFAs.

For those interested, here's the section from the CBA as to what can and cannot be discussed in an arbitration.

(ii) The parties may offer evidence of the following:
(A) the overall performance, including official statistics prepared by the League (both offensive and defensive), of the Player in the previous season or seasons;
(B) the number of games played by the Player, his injuries or illnesses during the preceding seasons;
(C) the length of service of the Player in the League and/or with the Club;
(D) the overall contribution of the Player to the competitive success or failure of his Club in the preceding season;
(E) any special qualities of leadership or public appeal not inconsistent with the fulfillment of his responsibilities as a playing member of his team;
(F) the overall performance in the previous season or seasons of any Player(s) who is alleged to be comparable to the party Player whose salary is in dispute; and
(G) The compensation of any Player(s) who is alleged to be comparable to the party Player, provided, however, that in applying this or any of the above subparagraphs, the Salary Arbitrator shall not consider a Player(s) to be comparable to the party Player unless a party to the arbitration has contended that the Player(s) is comparable; nor shall the Salary Arbitrator consider the compensation or performance of a Player(s) unless a party to the arbitration has contended that the Player(s) is comparable.
(iii) The following categories of evidence are inadmissible and shall not be considered by the Salary Arbitrator:
(A) Any SPC the term of which began when the Player party to such SPC was not a Group 2 Player;
(B) Any SPC entered into by an Unrestricted Free Agent, including SPCs signed by Players after the Player's Club has exercised a walk-away right pursuant to Section 12.10;
(C) The SPC of any Player who is not being offered as a comparable Player to the party Player;
(D) Qualifying Offers made by the Club pursuant to Section 10.2(b);
(E) Any prior offers or history of negotiations between the Player and the Club;
(F) Testimonials, videotapes, newspaper columns, press game reports or similar materials;
(G) Any reference to actual or potential walk-away rights;
(H) Any award issued by a Salary Arbitrator as to which a Club exercised its walk-away rights pursuant to Section 12.10;
(I) The financial condition of the Club or the League;
(J) References to a Club's Upper or Lower Limit, or to the Players' Share;
(K) Any salary arbitration award issued in 2005-2006; or
(L) Any reference to any salary or other compensation information in any salary arbitration opinion that took place prior to the execution of this Agreement. If any salary arbitration opinion issued prior to the execution of this Agreement is cited as precedent, all references to any Player's Player Paragraph 1 Salary or other compensation information will be redacted.


(iii) (A) makes me think that comparables are basically only RFAs re-signed this offseason (and those extended during the past season which begin this offseason). Or it could just mean any RFAs re-signed while this player was signed to a contract (in thie league)?

I am seeing something between 1.8 - 2.2 M from arbitration, not like 3 or 3.5 like he probably is requesting.

As stotch mentioned, comparables have to be RFAs.

For those interested, here's the section from the CBA as to what can and cannot be discussed in an arbitration.



Thanks snark!

Sorry about that, guys!

that's what happens when I try to run with something and it's wrong.

As stotch mentioned, comparables have to be RFAs.

For those interested, here's the section from the CBA as to what can and cannot be discussed in an arbitration.

That's a great bit of research, nice one!

Thanks snark!

Sorry about that, guys!

that's what happens when I try to run with something and it's wrong.

Kudos for finding that comparison though! I don't think I've ever seen an example of two players who compare so well in almost every statistic as Wiz and Van Ryn.

(iii) (A) makes me think that comparables are basically only RFAs re-signed this offseason (and those extended during the past season which begin this offseason). Or it could just mean any RFAs re-signed while this player was signed to a contract (in thie league)?


Just taking a closer look at this and at the question.
I believe it means that a contract (to compare) is not allowed unless the player signing that contract was a Group II free agent (aka a restricted free agent). So no entry level deals, no Group VI deals, no UFA deals (not offered a qualifying offer etc) and no Group III deals (unrestricted free agents as we normally see them).

I don't see how you could award Wiz more than 2.5 million.
See it yet?

I'm 110% sure you were repeatedly dropped as a child.

Just taking a closer look at this and at the question.
I believe it means that a contract (to compare) is not allowed unless the player signing that contract was a Group II free agent (aka a restricted free agent). So no entry level deals, no Group VI deals, no UFA deals (not offered a qualifying offer etc) and no Group III deals (unrestricted free agents as we normally see them).
I don't think I ever read this response until just now when the thread was bumped.

But I guess I could see that. So then far previous years could be used as comparables. For some reason I thought the "player party to such SPC" part referred to the player in arbitration, not the player being compared. But that makes more sense.

This board could start a internet-collective-law firm. We'd rule the courts. Or maybe we should apply to run a NHL team. I'm sure Detroit would cower.

at least theres no more risk for offer sheet. worst case scenario we get Wiz on a one year deal.

Where he elected, Anaheim controls term (years)...he was in a horrible bargaining position because there aren't a lot of players who were as injury prone heading into arbitration...he could end up with Steve McCarthy as a comparable, even if his talent is greater...