Heatley nixed a deal, after saying it was okay to talk to EDM, before july first that would have saved Melnyk 4 mil.
I'd say it's a 50/50 shot either way
__________________
"This probably the best I've felt in a real long time. . . . I think all the work I've put in over the last 10 years is starting to pay off." Chris Pronger, July 09
“Chris thinks he can play the full seven years and we expect he will play seven years,” Hanrahan said(Asst GM of Flyers)
Heatley nixed a deal, after saying it was okay to talk to EDM, before july first that would have saved Melnyk 4 mil.
I'd say it's a 50/50 shot either way
I would be very surprised if Melnyk won the grieveance before an impartial arbiter - Heatley just exercised the rights he had under his SPC.
IIRC, the initial talks of grievances (and Daly's positive comments) occurred while talks with Edmonton were still ongoing - and the original basis for the grievance was that Heatley delayed approving the deal so that Ottawa got stiffed for the bonus. If Heatley had delayed and then OKed the deal just after July 1, then I could maybe see some grounds for a grievance.
Heatley nixed a deal, after saying it was okay to talk to EDM, before july first that would have saved Melnyk 4 mil.
I'd say it's a 50/50 shot either way
Not the way I see it. Melnyk is invoking the "faint hope clause". There are no viable legal ground for the claim that I can see.
Greg Wyshinski (Puck Daddy) puts it thusly (and I agree):
Quote:
It doesn't matter if Barry and McAlpine gave the Senators permission to speak to the Oilers or the Orlando Rollergators; Ottawa gave Heatley the right to exercise a veto and gave him a bonus to collect as long as he was a Senator -- both of which he did. In fact, the bonus the Senators promised him actually harmed their ability to trade him.
In the battle of dumb versus selfish, the winner is selfish.
Barring any bombshells lingering off the record, this would appear to be a slam-dunk case for NHLPA lawyers.
Heatley nixed a deal, after saying it was okay to talk to EDM, before july first that would have saved Melnyk 4 mil.
I'd say it's a 50/50 shot either way
Are there any links or any stories that say the Heatley camp gave permission to the Sens to deal with the Oilers? I have heard it reported both ways, but in a recent interview Heatley said Edmonton was never on the list of acceptable teams.
Are there any links or any stories that say the Heatley camp gave permission to the Sens to deal with the Oilers? I have heard it reported both ways, but in a recent interview Heatley said Edmonton was never on the list of acceptable teams.
its in the OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrioch
Melnyk contends in the paperwork filed at the NHL’s New York headquarters, that Heatley’s camp — including agents J.P. Barry and Stacey McAlpine — gave the Senators permission to speak with the Oilers and the two-time, 50-goal scorer should have accepted the deal to Edmonton.
It’s believed Melnyk not only claims the decision by Heatley to kill the deal cost him $4 million, it also hurt the club’s ability to sell season tickets because of the uncertainty in the Senators camp.
the last part is interesting, because i think it suggests that melnyk blames the heatley camp for leaking the trade request.
__________________ "Now we know what the survivors of the Titanic felt like."
- Sens D Ken Hammond on the Senators first season
To the Sens fans who think there is even a shot, on what grounds? The only thing I hear from you guys is "wahh he could have left before 7/1."
Hurt feelings, meet cold hard contractual law.
I wasn't aware that the signing bonus was contingent on anything other than Heater being a Sen, which he was. Even if Heater gave permission, and later said 'eh no thanks to Edmonton', that is 1000% in his rights to do, thanks to mr. NTC.
Do players whine and sue when they get traded? "Mr. GM told me he would keep me!!! What do you mean is it in the contract? Does that matter?" Because that's pretty much what it sounds like out of Ottawa.
Does the arbitrator have any discretion to penalize parties who file frivolous grievances? The NHLPA ought to be able to recover legal expenses. This is just plain harassment by a sore loser who couldn't win by playing by the rules.
the last part is interesting, because i think it suggests that melnyk blames the heatley camp for leaking the trade request.
I meant something a little more concrete than "sources say" which you left out of your quote for what ever reason. I have googled a few articles that date back to when Heatley submited the teams he would accept a trade to, and not one of them has the Oilers listed as an acceptable trade.
Any ways I think the puckdaddy article above hits the nail on the head, it does not matter if Edmonton was on the list, there was no legal reason that Heatley had to accept the trade prior to the July 1st date, the only party bound by that date was the owner of Heatleys contract, which at the time was Ottawa
Last edited by snaggle toof: 11-03-2009 at 07:40 PM.
I agree with this, why would it effect Heatley? The players association is going to fight it, not Heatley and his private lawyers. Plus at the end of the day Heatley will be paid the amount he is owed and I doubt if it matters to him who signs the check.
That raises an interesting point, is there any way that Melnyk won't have to pay the 4$ mill but someone else/another organization will?
To the Sens fans who think there is even a shot, on what grounds? The only thing I hear from you guys is "wahh he could have left before 7/1."
Hurt feelings, meet cold hard contractual law.
I wasn't aware that the signing bonus was contingent on anything other than Heater being a Sen, which he was. Even if Heater gave permission, and later said 'eh no thanks to Edmonton', that is 1000% in his rights to do, thanks to mr. NTC.
Do players whine and sue when they get traded? "Mr. GM told me he would keep me!!! What do you mean is it in the contract? Does that matter?" Because that's pretty much what it sounds like out of Ottawa.
By your overgeneralized explanation of Sens fans' current opinion on the matter, you've also rationalized why Melnyk would be filing such grievances despite whether or not he'll win.
No we don't. Got some proof because all the reports I read indicate that Heatley tried to keep quiet but someone on th Senators side leaked it.
And set your emotions aside, because that's what the judge will do in this case, and at the end of the day the judge is going to rule in favor of the contract. Heatley was well within his rights as outlined per the contract.
And to be honest, if Melnyk is going around filing lawsuits to cause stress and grievance to people, then he could be sued himself. I believe this is called vexatious litigation and can be deemed an abuse of the judicial system.
Don't NHL player contracts have a "conduct unbecoming" type clause? If Ottawa ownership is this upset and intended to fight all the way, seems they would have had a bigger hammer by suspending him and not paying the $4M in the first place.
Turn the process around and make Heatley do the grievance-ing.
Does the arbitrator have any discretion to penalize parties who file frivolous grievances? The NHLPA ought to be able to recover legal expenses. This is just plain harassment by a sore loser who couldn't win by playing by the rules.
It cant be all that frivolous. Bill Daly said in the summer that Melnyk would have a case. Your last sentence is ridiculous. It makes no sense. There is no loser here. Melnyk didnt try to play outside of the rules.
Mod note - let's keep this discussion centered on the *business* aspect of grievance, NTCs, and the facts about Heatley's contract. Not on the personalities/qualities of the folks involved, nor the fans of any team.
Don't NHL player contracts have a "conduct unbecoming" type clause? If Ottawa ownership is this upset and intended to fight all the way, seems they would have had a bigger hammer by suspending him and not paying the $4M in the first place.
Turn the process around and make Heatley do the grievance-ing.
How could they suspend him? Based on what? He showed up to camp, said all along he would play if no deal was reached. I could be wrong, but I don't think you could just suspend him because he asked to be traded.
I guess the NHL could make a rule for players who demand a trade with a NTC
There's no need. All NTC/NMC's can be made conditional if you write it into the contract. Theoretically, they can make a league-wide rule but it wouldn't or shouldn't be all that important from an owner's front. Just write it into the silly contract and make it standard for all NTC's you hand out. If player requests a trade, he must do so in writing and list a negotiated number of teams he'd be willing to accept a trade to and it is done. The issue could've also been avoided had they not handed out a roster bonus. There's really no need for those in contracts anymore.
I don't get it. The only way this makes sense is if the Sharks didn't know about the $4 Million. Either the Sens pay the $4 Million or they get less in the trade. In either situation the "cost" of the trade would be the same.
Last edited by EvilPirateZamboni: 11-04-2009 at 12:30 AM.
I don't see what case the Senators have. Heatley has a NMC clause in his contract as did he have a bonus due to him by July 1. Just because he refused a trade to Edmonton (which was a contractual right of his) doesn't mean his right to that bonus on July 1st went away. Heatley clearly holds all of the contractual leverage in this case, and that is why he ultimately end up choosing (basically) San Jose as his new home. This case is pretty open and shut barring any facts that haven't come to light.
