BY FAN FUEL – HOCKEY CENTRAL INSIDERS
Welcome to Hockey Central: Ask the Insiders where fans get to pick the topics. This week, the Insiders answered several questions including their thoughts on the Jay Feaster-Ryan O’Reilly mess; NHL realignment; the injury history of Ryan Kesler and possible Olympics participation in 2014.
Cameron asks: Is the Jay Feaster-Ryan O’Reilly offer sheet story the worst example of an NHL GM screw up since Senators GM Mel Bridgman trying to draft THREE ineligible players at the club’s expansion draft?
Chris Johnston: This could have gone down as one of the biggest mistakes made by a general manager had Colorado chosen not to match Calgary’s offer sheet. But that obviously didn’t happen, which spared Feaster and the Flames from any tangible consequences for the error. As a result, the botched qualifying offers in Chicago a few years back ended up being much more costly of a mistake. In fact, it basically cost Dale Tallon his job with the organization a year before it won the Stanley Cup.
Doug MacLean: Cameron, it was a big mistake. Luckily the Avs matched or it would have definitely been monumental. Losing a first and third round picks and not getting player would have been a disaster. Not to mention the $2.5 million signing bonus. Chicago didn’t get qualifying offers on a group of group two free agents a few years ago and it was also a major problem for Dale Tallon.
Neil Smith: It definitely ultimately falls unto the GM to have everything right before making such a bold move. However, in this case all three parties involved, Calgary, Newport Sports (agent) and Colorado seem to have been taken by surprise. Many people wonder why Calgary didn’t ask the league for advice, but this really isn’t the normal thing to do when making this kind of an offer sheet to a restricted free agent. The team will work in concert with the agent to get the deal done and not normally talk to the league office until they’ve signed the deal. Obviously Colorado didn’t know about the player having played in Europe post January 19th or they wouldn’t have matched so quickly and would have looked at other options, like demanding a horribly high trading price to save the Flames from the predicament. The agents would never have signed the player to the offer had they known about the problem since they represent not only Jarome Iginla but also many other Flames and future Flames and this would have soured the relationship. Make no mistake, this is a major mistake by the Flames, but one that was difficult to see in advance.
Brian Lawton: There certainly have been other rocky moments for general managers as discussed on Sportsnet like the Chicago Blackhawks missing out on timely filing qualifying offers (Dale Tallon shortly thereafter lost his job). However, the handling of the Ryan O’ Reilly situation would have been the most damaging of moves to an organization that I have ever seen in the history of the National Hockey League with regard to interpretation of the CBA. Luckily disaster was avoided.
To be clear, Jay Feaster is a nice man. Always mindful and thoughtful to others in the business but the explanations that have come out of Calgary as to what they did and what they thought are bizarre at best. As Mark Spector so eloquently pointed out “this may not have been Jay Feaster’s fault but it certainly would have been his problem!”
Consider that what would have happened to Calgary if the Avalanche didn’t match the offer is worse than most even realize. Sportsnet’s own Chris Johnston broke the initial story regarding the potential for loss of draft picks without ending up with the player but what hasn’t been talked about is it was clear that the way the offer was structured the Calgary Flames were going to suffer additional losses. Because the $2,500,000 signing bonus was due upon execution on purpose to hinder the Avalanche from matching the offer, the Flames also would have had to pay that amount to O’Reilly prior to losing him on waivers. The end result would have been a lost first and third round pick in a deep 2013 draft along with $2,500,000 of cash while ending up with no player! A devastating result for any organization but maybe none more so than Calgary that is not exactly stocked with a plethora of prospects waiting in the wings like their neighbors to the North!
The explanation that the club didn’t agree with the NHL’s interpretation of the rule is not acceptable when putting your organizations assets, cash and future at risk by putting forth the offer sheet. If you’re the general manager and you’re not certain on a rule or need an interpretation then you or your staff pick up the phone and contact Central Registry to ask for a clarification on an issue this critical prior to making the offer not after!
To state you don’t agree with the explanation given after the fact by the NHL and you were prepared to advance your position is not good enough when managing an NHL club. The burden of leadership and responsibility is so much greater than that. Credit the NHL for diffusing the situation quickly by calling it academic because the Avalanche matched the offer. And if you’re a Calgary Flames fan get down and kiss the sacred Saddledome ground for a disaster averted!
Jeff asks: What are your opinions on realignment? To me it seems they are taking a step backwards by making one conference bigger than the other. MLB just recognized and corrected this error. What’s wrong with two 15 team conferences? At least wait until expansion. The Red Wings have waited this long, what is a couple more years? Thanks.
Nick Kypreos: I’m with you Jeff, I’d sooner wait than have 16 teams in the East and 14 teams in the West. For no other reason than it looks goofy. Why not have Detroit and Winnipeg switch and call it day and still have an even balance of 15/15. No doubt in my mind promises were made to the Red Wings and Blue Jackets and those promises are trying to be kept. The bigger picture here Jeff is where is relocation and expansion in all of this? The other no doubter here is the 16/14 presented by the league is a temporary solution to what the league has planned long term. I don’t like the band-aid solution anymore than you do.
Scott Morrison: The imbalance is a great source of concern amongst many players, that’s for sure. If they got Winnipeg to the West and Detroit to the East, it would work, but then it seems Columbus has been promised a move, too. The wild card is appeasing some players, but not all general managers are happy with that. Of course, you are never going to please everyone. And I’m not sure that Detroit would want to wait another three years for a move. Awkward situation to say the least. Since 1967 I think there have been 13 different alignments and none have been “perfect.”
John Shannon: Actually Jeff, I just posted a new opinion piece on this very subject on Sportsnet.ca. I totally agree with you. I now think they should make minimal changes to the current format, and wait for the dust to settle on re-location and expansion. Give Winnipeg a chance to play in the west, and move Nashville to the Southeast and stand pat from there until new buildings and opportunities are available in Quebec City, Markham, Seattle and Las Vegas (who announced a new arena last Friday). It makes the most sense to me.
Rob asks: How do the Canucks address the Ryan Kesler injury? How much of a concern is his injury frequency to team management?
Doug MacLean: Rob, this is a tough situation for Vancouver. Kesler can’t be replaced. He is that important. He and Sedin give the Canucks one of the best one-two punch down the middle in the league. They can get by until playoff time and they can’t make a trade that will bring a player like this guy. Centre ice man are tough to find.
Jeff Marek: First off, it’s a huge concern and something the Canucks always have front of mind. It really is too bad that we’ll probably never see that Ryan Kesler we saw in the 2011 playoffs, especially in the Nashville and San Jose series but I suppose it’s a lesson to everyone that the body can only absorb so much punishment. Kesler going head-to-head with Shea Weber in the Preds series is what will always stand out for me in the Canucks run that postseason. Look, Ryan Kesler has a body that’s been banged up and he’ll probably always need “something” done to it. Living with pain and injury is something he will most likely always have to endure and the Canucks will have to work with it and around it. When he’s healthy and in the lineup he’s a perennial Selke Trophy candidate and you can’t quit on that (heck they traded Cody Hodgson who would be a great fit as a second line middleman but that’s Kesler’s spot) but I suspect Vancouver will always be on the hunt for more depth at that position. You can’t replace a player like Kesler, teams don’t let go of players like that all the Canucks can do is ensure they have players who can step up into that role seemingly every season.
Hockey Darren asks: Will the NHL ever award three points for a regulation win making all games worth the same amount of points?
John Shannon: Don’t think so Darren. The current format of two for a win, one for an OT loss or shootout loss has been very successful for the NHL. It has kept playoff races going longer, and made the fans feel their teams are much more competitive. I actually like what it has done for most teams. A three-point victory would create a large gap between the winning teams and losing team in the standings, and that’s not good business for the NHL.
Brian Lawton: Not for a very long time, if ever in my opinion. The NHL is very happy with the effect the point system currently has in the NHL. It does one incredibly great thing for ticket sales and that is keeping everyone in the stands as long as possible which ultimately leads to more ticket sales! Follow the money and you usually find your answer!
Mario asks: Will the NHL ever adopt the no-touch icing rule, or does a player have to get killed before it happens? I watch games and guys are just getting slammed in the end boards, players are faster and bigger.
Doug MacLean: Mario, I’ve sat in many GM meetings on this very topic. They are trying a variety of new ways to fix this. The hybrid rule was tried in the AHL but taken out. They will relook at this. I agree it has become dangerous and I have lost players due to this rule. But a lot of GM’ s want it left alone as they like the hockey play that sometimes develops off it.
Jeff Marek: Not sure about you, but I watch a lot of junior hockey where the no-touch rule is in effect and from an optics point of view it looks, well, to be honest, awful. The puck goes down the ice and only one person skates – the linesman. Everybody else does statue practice. The league is, and rightfully so, maintaining a flow over the full 60 minutes of the game and no-touch icing works at loggerheads with that plan. Having said that, player safety with the increased speeds as you mention is a more crucial department that the league takes more seriously than ever. It’s a puck chase, which is one of the foundations of the game. The league is wary to adopt any rule that eliminates them, and I agree with that but I do think a fair compromise is the hybrid icing we’ve seen experimented with at various R & D camps. Having said that, it does add yet another thing for the officials to pay attention to and introduces more of the human element (i.e. potential blown calls) to a game which is getting more and more difficult to call.
Chris Johnston: There is nothing to suggest that no-touch icing will be adopted by the NHL. It’s an issue the league has looked at several times over the years — it seems like Don Cherry has been trumpeting the cause since “Coach’s Corner” debuted — but there has never been enough support among general managers to act. A modified version of the icing rule is likely to be implemented long before no-touch is introduced. It’s a shame, but it’s the truth.
Neil Smith: I believe the NHL will adopt “no touch icing” at some point in the future. However, before addressing this NHL should address “board checking” in its entirety. When the rules were originally written in the 1920’s by Lester and Frank Patrick and Art Ross, the founders of the rule book never envisioned the type of “board checking” we see today. In fact, the rule book has always had a “boarding” minor penalty in it stating “boarding shall be called when a player hits or throws his opponent violently into the boards”. Under that standard we should see a boarding call on almost every shift in an NHL game. Boarding all over the ice has become acceptable and has gradually become the cause of countless injuries to hockey players at all levels of competition. Checking a man into the dasher boards was NEVER envisioned by the founders of the game of hockey. Body checking was the skill of separating the man from the puck by the use of your body. This was NOT to be used as a tactic to intimidate your opponent but as a true checking technique in a contact sport.
Ian asks: What do you think it will take to reach a deal for NHLers to participate in the 2014 Olympic Games in Sochi? Is there any sort of cut-off date?
Scott Morrison: The league and the PA are both going to have to receive improved access to players and video during the Olympics, improved marketing opportunities, those sorts of things. Put simply they have to improve how they monetize the experience and grow the exposure. There will be more meetings in the next couple of weeks and time is of the essence because the NHL has to work on a schedule. Of course, that means realignment has to be figured out first.
John Shannon: Ian, we are told the cut-off date for Olympic participation is the World Hockey Championships in May, but I suspect a deal will be done long before that. Major issues to still be resolved are player insurance and travel, both very expensive issues that the IOC and the IIHF are expected to pay for. The four parties involved (IOC, IIHF, NHL, NHLPA) are expected to meet in the next couple of weeks to continue the negotiations, and while they won’t be finalized in that time period, they are inching closer. Key for the NHL and the players is the other aspects of what playing in the Olympics means. Will there be access for the NHL and NHLPA digital media people (which in previous Olympics has not happened) and can this negotiation get the ball rolling on future International events, like the World Cup of Hockey, are also important issues that need to be resolved.
Patrick asks: It seems the NHL waits to see how serious a player’s injury is before deciding the length of suspension (if any at all). Do you feel there should be a shift towards putting more emphasis on punishing the act itself rather than the severity of the resulting injury? I understand past history normally has something to do with it, but what about a fresh start?
Nick Kypreos: Patrick, unfortunately its not as black and white as you’ve suggested. You can’t put any more emphasis on punishing the act itself rather than the severity of the injury any more than you already do. Is attempted murder viewed the same as murder in a court of law? No, so the “act” or “intent” will continue to get some leniency in correlation to injury. It has also been suggested to me by some GMs if a suspended player is out as long as an injured player in a playoff series, a team would purposely extend that injury if the suspended player was viewed as a “key” guy or “star” on the opposing team. Can you believe that Patrick? There is no place teams wouldn’t go to win. There is also no simple solution to all of this suspension madness. It is what it is.