Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    This article raises an interesting question:

    http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/26/nhl_offer_sheets_dirty_poile_weber_holmgren_flyers_predators/

    Are they a dirty play or a respected and accepted tactic?

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    I think the biggest problem for GMs is that the tendering of an offer sheet takes the entire negotiation out of your control.  All you have left is a 'yes-no' decision.  The length of term, size and nature of bonuses, total dollars -- all things which form an important part of negotiations -- have now been set in stone, by someone who clearly doesn't have the best interest of your organization in mind.

    Now, one can say that the organization itself opens the door for offer sheets, because they haven't moved as quickly as they could have to lock up the RFA on their own terms.  Sign your RFAs to extensions prior to July 1, and the problem goes away.

    The caveat to my remarks is that I don't really know how the whole offer sheet process works.  Does the offering GM negotiate with the player's agent?  Or does he simply 'make an offer'?

    If it's the former, then a player who genuinely wishes to remain with his original team could instruct his agent to structure the deal in such a way as to make it more likely that his original team would match; rather than making it punitive to do so.  For the player, it's really the best of both worlds -- he gets to virtually 'write his own deal', while still keeping open the possibility that he gets to remain with his original team (assuming that's what he wants). 

    If it's the latter, the offering GM can structure the deal such that it's very difficult and/or punitive to the other GM to match.

    It's this element which makes the offer sheet an unpopular tactic, in that, by matching, you're allowing another GM to set your team's salary structure, which causes ripple effects when it comes time to re-sign your other players.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    For many years pro sports were able to hold players hostage with no way out until Curt Flood came along. The "offer sheet" to an RFA is and was a clever move by the players association presented to them by player agents. It makes GMs move quicker (Weber is a good scenario) on contracts and gives players who are not happy with an organization get a chance to move along.

    It's a great idea because it induces player movement forced or not. If the owners get their this CBA with what they want in how long they have the rights to rookies (5 years instead of 3 years) and before a player becomes a UFA. Offer sheets will come into play allot more in the future.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]I think the biggest problem for GMs is that the tendering of an offer sheet takes the entire negotiation out of your control.  All you have left is a 'yes-no' decision.  The length of term, size and nature of bonuses, total dollars -- all things which form an important part of negotiations -- have now been set in stone, by someone who clearly doesn't have the best interest of your organization in mind. Now, one can say that the organization itself opens the door for offer sheets, because they haven't moved as quickly as they could have to lock up the RFA on their own terms.  Sign your RFAs to extensions prior to July 1, and the problem goes away. The caveat to my remarks is that I don't really know how the whole offer sheet process works.  Does the offering GM negotiate with the player's agent?  Or does he simply 'make an offer'? If it's the former, then a player who genuinely wishes to remain with his original team could instruct his agent to structure the deal in such a way as to make it more likely that his original team would match; rather than making it punitive to do so.  For the player, it's really the best of both worlds -- he gets to virtually 'write his own deal', while still keeping open the possibility that he gets to remain with his original team (assuming that's what he wants).  If it's the latter, the offering GM can structure the deal such that it's very difficult and/or punitive to the other GM to match. It's this element which makes the offer sheet an unpopular tactic, in that, by matching, you're allowing another GM to set your team's salary structure, which causes ripple effects when it comes time to re-sign your other players.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    This is a tricky one. I believe that the offering GM makes an offer to the player/agent who then has the option to accept. If they do accept then the offer sheet is considered tendered and the about to be screwed GM then has the option to match or not. The key is that the player has to accept the offer. In the Weber case, Holmgren gave Weber/agent his offer and Weber accepted. Once Weber did this, Poile then had his decision to make. Negotiations between Weber and Holmgren almost certainly took place at some level beforehand because if Weber does not accept the offer, Holmgren becomes even more of a pariah.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]For many years pro sports were able to hold players hostage with no way out until Curt Flood came along. The "offer sheet" to an RFA is and was a clever move by the players association presented to them by player agents. It makes GMs move quicker (Weber is a good scenario) on contracts and gives players who are not happy with an organization get a chance to move along. It's a great idea because it induces player movement forced or not. If the owners get their this CBA with what they want in how long they have the rights to rookies (5 years instead of 3 years) and before a player becomes a UFA. Offer sheets will come into play allot more in the future.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]

    Good argument for it. The counterview would be that a team spends its own draft pick and literally millions of dollars on a prospect and their ensuing development. One of the bonuses for doing so is having the player controllable for an amount of time so the team can have at least some modicum of return on its investment. An offer sheet circumvents this somewhat. Also, those teams that seem to actually tender offer sheets are the better off teams who poach the best up and coming players from teams in less financially optimal situations. Fair?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty? : The counterview would be that a team spends its own draft pick and literally millions of dollars on a prospect and their ensuing development. One of the bonuses for doing so is having the player controllable for an amount of time so the team can have at least some modicum of return on its investment. An offer sheet circumvents this somewhat.  Fair? Posted by jmwalters[/QUOTE]

    Teams spend money on scouting and drafting anyways that's a given. You can match it to keep the investment or you get compensation in return. Very fair promotes player movement if a club decides to invest the money elsewhere.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty? : Teams spend money on scouting and drafting anyways that's a given. You can match it to keep the investment or you get compensation in return. Very fair promotes player movement if a club decides to invest the money elsewhere.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]

    I agree. Though, I think you are right when you say the new CBA will try and add more preventative measures on future offer sheets and RFA configurations
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty? : I agree. Though, I think you are right when you say the new CBA will try and add more preventative measures on future offer sheets and RFA configurations Posted by jmwalters[/QUOTE]

    I am for offer sheets and I don't think the NHLPA nor the richer owners will allow it to happen.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty? : I am for offer sheets and I don't think the NHLPA nor the richer owners will allow it to happen.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]

    Not if Holgmren has anything to say about it that's for sure.

    Question for you, do you think that had Holmgren known a little earlier that Poile was going to match he would have went after nash a little harder? From my perspective the Rangers sent so little in return because Howson did not have a better one pending (obviously). Holmgren is known for going for the "prize" even if it is not exactly what his club needs. Any thoughts?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    After the Preds lost Suter, the smart money would have been on Poile to match.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty? : Not if Holgmren has anything to say about it that's for sure. Question for you, do you think that had Holmgren known a little earlier that Poile was going to match he would have went after nash a little harder? From my perspective the Rangers sent so little in return because Howson did not have a better one pending (obviously). Holmgren is known for going for the "prize" even if it is not exactly what his club needs. Any thoughts?
    Posted by jmwalters[/QUOTE]
    You could be right JM but if that's the case, then shame on Holmgren for not having a contingency plan. If he really was willing to give a better package than NY offered, then he should've already pitched it to Howson. He easily could've said to Howson, "listen, you see what we have going on right now but I'm willing to offer you player ABC if the Weber thing happens to fall through". I really don't think teams were willing to give as much as we thought they might for Nash. You could probably consider that a fact.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty? : Not if Holgmren has anything to say about it that's for sure. Question for you, do you think that had Holmgren known a little earlier that Poile was going to match he would have went after nash a little harder? Holmgren is known for going for the "prize" even if it is not exactly what his club needs. Any thoughts ? Posted by jmwalters[/QUOTE]

    My thoughts are that Poile had to wait for the Nashville's ownership group of investors to approve the matching of the offer sheet. Homgren is no fool he knows that the Preds are on a strict budget so he gambled. Here in lies why Suter said see yah because he knew if he stayed Nashville wouldn't have allot of money left to spend on additional good players to propel the club out of the 2nd round of the playoffs after resigning Weber as well.

    You have to have something in place that doesn't allow players to be restricted to one organization. Nashville isn't that poor 16,690 in attendance per game, three slots behind the Bruins.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    Suter and Weber are not on the same sheet of ice talent wise, imo.  I am proponent of FA as is but not with a RFA.  Offer what you can afford, if not then let it go.  In defense of the owners, no comment on collusion should be uttered by the players.  Given the fact certain owners cannot control their needs and wants, I think it is a positive that a Cap is in existence.  So to finish, no, offer sheets are totally legitimate! And the NHLPA cannot cry foul if teams decide not to spend as a group when the economy is in disarray.  The proof is now.  Given the economic conditions no team should have been offering the Pairise, Suter, Weber, and the like Kovy contracts.  Greed will always out duel a well laid financial plan.  So let greed exist with limitations ie a Cap.  
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    I think Poile should thank Holmgren and the Flyers. Maybe he was going to give Weber that much, maybe not, but he didnt have to spend much time drawing up a contract, the Flyers did it for him.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]It makes GMs move quicker (Weber is a good scenario) on contracts and gives players who are not happy with an organization get a chance to move along. It's a great idea because it induces player movement forced or not. If the owners get their this CBA with what they want in how long they have the rights to rookies (5 years instead of 3 years) and before a player becomes a UFA. Offer sheets will come into play allot more in the future.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]

    The history of the RFA in the NHL doesn't bear out a lot of this, though, 'Dog.  Players rarely move as a result of the offer sheet - Penner and Scott Stevens are the only two of much significance that I remember.  Good players who want to move are foolish to sign offer sheets, especially for long term deals, because the team they want to flee can match, and if they do, they can't even trade you.  You've basically just signed a deal with them.  And the new thresholds in the CBA proposal are just a roll-back to where things were a decade ago, so I don't think there will be many more RFAs moving.  The guys the proposal will affect aren't moving now; they're just getting fear-based inflationary  deals.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]I think the biggest problem for GMs is that the tendering of an offer sheet takes the entire negotiation out of your control.  All you have left is a 'yes-no' decision.  The length of term, size and nature of bonuses, total dollars -- all things which form an important part of negotiations -- have now been set in stone, by someone who clearly doesn't have the best interest of your organization in mind. Now, one can say that the organization itself opens the door for offer sheets, because they haven't moved as quickly as they could have to lock up the RFA on their own terms.  Sign your RFAs to extensions prior to July 1, and the problem goes away. The caveat to my remarks is that I don't really know how the whole offer sheet process works.  Does the offering GM negotiate with the player's agent?  Or does he simply 'make an offer'? If it's the former, then a player who genuinely wishes to remain with his original team could instruct his agent to structure the deal in such a way as to make it more likely that his original team would match; rather than making it punitive to do so.  For the player, it's really the best of both worlds -- he gets to virtually 'write his own deal', while still keeping open the possibility that he gets to remain with his original team (assuming that's what he wants).  If it's the latter, the offering GM can structure the deal such that it's very difficult and/or punitive to the other GM to match. It's this element which makes the offer sheet an unpopular tactic, in that, by matching, you're allowing another GM to set your team's salary structure, which causes ripple effects when it comes time to re-sign your other players.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    ...

    what?

    ...

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    I'm a huge fan of offer sheets.  I cannot stand any of this buddy-buddy stuff in the NHL.  I don't like when the players are pals, and I don't like it when the owners are pals. 

    I'm also not a fan of long, drawn out negotiations.  Make it simple.  These hold out players drive me nuts. 

    Here's our first offer.  There might not be a second.

    Okay, here's the second offer.

    No?  Okay.  Go home.  Call us when playing hockey for four million dollars a year is "good enough" for you.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    'Dog's point about Curt Flood is that all forms of FA are based on the concept that a player can get paid what he is worth on the open market - so if you have a stacked team and your third line RW would be a first line star on 15 other teams, the player can go to a team willing to pay him to play that role.  Or at least make an equivalent salary to play 3rd fiddle for you. 

    The restricted FA provisions recognize the investment a team has made in a player by giving them either compensation for that investment (here, you did so well developing this prospect, draft three more!) or the right to match but still allowing the market for the player to determine how the player gets paid - length of deal, salary, non-salary considerations....  But the point is that the player is a free agent and can negotiate with any team - so GM's and agents can talk though the deal in whatever fashion or depth they want without "tampering".  It's not a silent auction.  This is the whole point - finding out what the market for a player "really" is.

    But it's hugely flawed.  Where it seems "dirty" is that teams typically overpay to pry a player away.  If the salary was genuinely market value, then the team with the right to match would match every time, so why would you ever bother to negotiate and write up a deal?  To actually get the player, you have ot make the contract unpalatable.  Make it crazy long, front load it, or go after a team that you think would have to make hard choices about other players it now can't afford.  You look for a team under pressure - but teams will find other ways of relieving that pressure. PC made it clear with Kessel that he would rather have matched Burke's RFA offer and buried salary in the minors than let Kessel walk based on an RFA sheet.  The whole "dirty" element isn't RFA in and of itself; it's what teams do to actually pry a player away that makes it terrible for teams.

    It has always seemed to me that RFA was useless except as a threat.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    Offer Sheets are not dirty as they are within the guidelines of the rules laid forth.  However, there seems to be almost a gentlemen's agreement between GM's to not pouch RFA's from opposing teams.  I bet players absolutely love these rules and wish that more GMs would make moves on RFAs to escalate salaries.  Fan bases and most GMs probably think otherwise as it is seen as "stealing" and escalating salaries.

    My bed sheets, however, are very dirty. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:[QUOTE]I'm a huge fan of offer sheets.  I don't like when the players are pals, and I don't like it when the owners are pals.  I'm also not a fan of long, drawn out negotiations.  Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    #1 Reason for me and makes the GM of the team that has the RFA rights make a move!

    "But the point is that the player is a free agent and can negotiate with any team - so GM's and agents can talk though the deal in whatever fashion or depth they want without "tampering"It's not a silent auction.  This is the whole point - finding out what the market for a player "really" is."

    Again forcing GMs to get it in gear!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    I think as long as offer sheets are a legitimate legal way of doing business, they cannot be considered "dirty" on the surface.

    However, I think when a team like the Flyers specifically and intentionally constructs an offer sheet to make it destructive for the team to match it, i.e. the front-loading of cash in order to hurt the Preds in the Weber case, it may still be legal, but its a little bit slimy.

    I agree with NAS, why pretend everyone is friends here... but as in high-stakes business, politics and the legal world, sometimes you have to make certain allegences with those you would prefer not to, in order to succeed in the long run.  I have superficial relationships with defense attorneys I can't stand, but it often makes my job easier some days.

    If I were Poille, I'd have a very long memory about the way the Flyers constructed that offer.

    And if I'm Weber, I'd never, ever sign an offer sheet when I was a year away from UFA.  That's just stupid of him to allow himself to be locked into a lifetime deal with a team he just turned his back on and clearly demonstrated he didnt want to play for.
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    In Response to Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?:
    [QUOTE]I think as long as offer sheets are a legitimate legal way of doing business, they cannot be considered "dirty" on the surface. However, I think when a team like the Flyers specifically and intentionally constructs an offer sheet to make it destructive for the team to match it, i.e. the front-loading of cash in order to hurt the Preds in the Weber case, it may still be legal, but its a little bit slimy. I agree with NAS, why pretend everyone is friends here... but as in high-stakes business, politics and the legal world, sometimes you have to make certain allegences with those you would prefer not to, in order to succeed in the long run.  I have superficial relationships with defense attorneys I can't stand, but it often makes my job easier some days. If I were Poille, I'd have a very long memory about the way the Flyers constructed that offer. And if I'm Weber, I'd never, ever sign an offer sheet when I was a year away from UFA.  That's just stupid of him to allow himself to be locked into a lifetime deal with a team he just turned his back on and clearly demonstrated he didnt want to play for.
    Posted by SoxFanInIL[/QUOTE]
    I'm not sure that's true. He knew the Preds could match. Sakic had no problems staying with the Avs after signing an offer sheet to Broadway. I'm also not sure Weber left any money on the table by signing now.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from jpBsSoxFan. Show jpBsSoxFan's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    I was kind of surprised by the Flyers offer sheet to Weber. I was under the impression that the GM's had an unwritten agreement or code of ethics that they would not pursue RFA's from other teams to prevent hard feelings between each other. Given the fact that Weber signed that offer from the Flyers, I wonder if there will be any kind of awkwardness between him & the Preds. Offer sheets spices things up for sure. I personally don't mind them, but I wonder how PC would react if Rask had signed a rich offer sheet from another team.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Are Offer Sheets Dirty?

    I think they are dirty under most circumstances.  Offers like the Vanek or Weber sheets were dirty. They were on the team's franchise player and they would be forced to match. The offering team doesn't get the player, they just screw the matching team with an inflated contract. That's dirty play. Offer sheets like the Penner or (potentially) Kessel ones weren't so much dirty as taking advantage of a team near the cap to steal a player. Of course both of them backfired, so I think they are a bad idea.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share