In Defense of Jay Feaster

Kent Wilson
March 02 2013 12:23PM

 


 

The fall-out from the Ryan O'Reilly debacle is still on-going, but there seems to be a strong, gathering sentiment that Jay Feaster should be fired for the near misstep. After some consideration I have (surprisingly) come down on the side of the beleaguered Flames GM.

I'll first establish that his is not a blanket endorsement of Feaster, Calgary's roster, or the Flames management in general. Regular readers know I have been consistently and loudly vocal whenever I have found reason for criticism over the years. I think there have been mistakes made, that the current team is in rough shape and that the organization is nearing a very critical crossroads. To be honest, I don't really know if this is the managment team I'd prefer at the helm when the tough decisions have to be made.

That said, in this instance, Feaster's actions and the resultant error were defensible.

First, because it was the right move from a hockey perspective. Ryan O'Reilly filled some very real short-term and long-term needs for the Flames organization, so he was an appropriate target for this kind of action. In addition, Feaster and company structured the contract in such a way to maximize the chances of the Avalanche walking away (ie; maximize the pain of matching) so although Colorado chose to match the offer, they will be facing some rather awkward consequences down the road as a result. I'm okay with the Flames messing up a divisonal rivals balacne sheet, even if the gambit to secure the player in question failed.

So this was a sound move strategically. In fact, it's the kind of tactic I'd like to see more of from Calgary's decision makers down the line.

Secondly, the offending CBA clause is so new, so obscure and so ambiguous that none of the parties involved in this situation - be it the Avalanche, the Flames or even the player's agent - seemed to have been aware of it. In fact, in retrospect, ignorance of this clause seems to be a far greater misstep for Colorado's management than for Calgary's. Not only could they have short-circuited O'Reilly's leverage in negotiations by publicizing this clause, but it also would have increased their leverage in any trade talks they had with other teams. No chance of an offer sheet means no alternative but to negotiate with the Avs directly for the player.

There's an argument that Sherman and company knew about the clause but wanted to potentially trap teams into offer sheets, but it doesn't hold water. Particularly since Colorado matched the Flames contract immediately even though it's structure is rather uncomfortable for them.

In addition, not even the players own agent knew about the waiver rule. 

O'Reilly's agent, Pat Morris of Newport Sports Management, said Friday that he didn't know his client would head to waivers if Colorado chose to not meet Flames GM Jay Feaster’s offer -- a compelling twist to an already intriguing saga that was reported by Sportsnet.ca’s Chris Johnston earlier in the day.

“Certainly not, or I never would have put Jay or Calgary or any other team in that situation,” Morris told Jeff Marek and Greg Wyshynksi on the duo's Marek vs. Wyshynksi podcast. “When you’re dealing with Europe, there’s some complicated situations.”

Again, there's an argument that Morris did in fact know and was protecting his players interests by nevertheless garnering offer sheets from unaware teams. This is certainly possible since an agents first priority is upping his clients market value, although that means he would have had to find out at some point after O'Reilly played in the KHL in January (which triggered the clause) and kept it to himself - otherwise Morris would have simply advised his client not to take to European ice once the NHL season started.

This strikes me as rather implausible overall. It's one thing to fight for a players interests within the confines of the CBA, but upping his value by banking on the misinterpretation of an obscure rule (that would ulimately undermine and humiliate the team he reached an agreement with) seems like a pretty poor way to do business since it would probably tarnish both the agent's and the agenice's reputation in the eyes of the Flames and Avs. I suppose Morris could try to protect himself from backlash had this all gone down by pleading ignorance, but I doubt he'd get much sympathy from the Feaster, Sherman or the GM's in the league in general.

In fact, given how often the possibility of an offer sheet was openly discussed in the media and with various executives around the league prior to the Flames proffering one, it's seems nobody had taken the time to pour over the clause in question and effectively understand it. One wonders if the NHL would even have had the presence of mind to enforce it had the Avalanche walked away (and Chris Jonhston had not independently done the due diligence to uncover the issue and bring it to everyone's attention).

Certainly the consequences of this error would have been massive for the Flames. That and the fact the team is again completely underwhelming on the ice seems to be fueling the antipathy for Calgary's general manger currently. And fair enough. The offer sheet, at least how it was structured and whom it targetted, was the right move, however. And the error, given the circumstances of the CBA, the wording of the rule and the general ignorance of it from all parties involved - including, perhaps, the bulk of the NHL - makes it an easy one to make.

It's arguable to say the Flames should have double-checked the proceedings with the NHL prior to doing the offer sheet, but that's easy to suggest in hindsight - as mentioned, prior to Johnston digging up the clause in the wake of the Avs matching, no one in the league or the media had noted that O'Reilly was eligible for waivers and therefore not a viable target for an offer sheet. Not TSN, not Elliotte Friedman, no one with the Avalanche nor anywhere else. It therefore strikes me as a mistake anyone in this situation would have made and, as such, not an egregious example of negligence or incompetence.

As mentioned previously, I think there are other reasons to be critical of Feaster and the Flames organization. With Calgary facing a 4th straight year out of the playoffs and with an aging core and no apparent way to meaningfully improve in the short-term, there's plenty of room for criticism.

On this particular issue, though, I think the vitriol is misplaced.

39d8109299a9795cb3b41a4e9b49d501
Former Nations Overlord. Current Fn contributor and curmudgeon For questions, complaints, criticisms, etc contact Kent @ kent.wilson@gmail. Follow him on Twitter here.
Avatar
#51 beloch
March 02 2013, 09:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Had Colorado not matched the offer sheet and this odd rule was then brought to light, I strongly suspect the league would have quietly changed the rule to let ROR come straight to Calgary. They would have looked like total clowns if they let improperly written letters of the law counter it's spirit in a way that would have such a large impact on a club.

As for Feaster, I say the big pass/fail moment for him is this trade deadline. If he says "We're going for it!" and stands pat or starts buying, it will be time for change.

Avatar
#52 RossCreekNation
March 02 2013, 11:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

I've said what I have to say on twitter - I think it is indefensible. I don't think "no one else knew about waivers either" or "the Avs matched, so it's all moot anyways" are good enough defenses. Feaster & the Flames are the team that signed the deal. They are the only ones that HAD to know the ramifications, and they failed. Fire Feaster, fire Holditch. Vote of non-confidence. This "head in the sand", "no harm, no foul" attitude some are displaying is no good. Accountability... let's see some.

Sidenote: could you imagine the outrage if Darryl Sutter were still here & made this gaffe? Doubt he'd have gotten a pass.

Avatar
#53 RossCreekNation
March 02 2013, 11:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Mike Gillis on After Hours, when asked if he knew O'Reilly would have to go on waivers aftersigning an offersheet: "Yes."

Avatar
#54 suba steve
March 03 2013, 12:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@RossCreekNation

reports are that VAN offered ROR a contract, but were turned down. If that is the case, Gillis may be telling a little white lie on this one.

Avatar
#55 RossCreekNation
March 03 2013, 12:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

And I'm not buying for a second that O'Reilly's agent didn't know he'd have to go on waivers.

Lowetide had an agent on his show Sat afternoon, and the agent carefully said that with the new CBA, and the MOU, he looked over anything that would affect his clients & that anything that didn't specifically affect his clients would be gone over this summer once he gets his hands on the official CBA documents. In other words, if he had a client that was a RFA playing in Europe, he (and every agent) would know everything that affectes his client.

Here's my theory: ROR's agent knew exactly what was up. There's a reason he abruptly left KHL 2 days after NHL season started - agent discovered gaffe, but not until it was too late. Got ROR to come back home & hope no one else would catch it & immediately went to work trying to get an offersheet before COL discovered the gaffe & eliminated that leverage. Process obv took longer than anticipated. Agent knew full well that ROR would never play with team he signed with; knew either a) COL would match, or b) he'd go on waivers & be claimed by CBJ. At that point, all agent could do for ROR was "show him the money" with knowledge he'd be playing in COL or CBJ. CGY & Feaster became the sucker. Ultimately, agent has to look out for # 1 - ROR. Sorry, CGY. Agent then claims to have not known so that he doesn't make himself or CGY look so bad. Got his player $$

Avatar
#56 RossCreekNation
March 03 2013, 12:09AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@suba steve

I never heard it that way. I heard O'Reilly's agent approaches Vancouver about signing an offer sheet.

Avatar
#57 RossCreekNation
March 03 2013, 12:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

And one more thing...

Daren Millard & Brian Lawton were talking about this today, and had Colorado not matched, not only would Calgary been out the 1st & 3rd, and O'Reilly, but they would have also been on the hook for the $2.5M signing bonus (which I assume would then have counted against Calgary's cap).

Avatar
#58 schevvy
March 03 2013, 12:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

And one more thing...

Daren Millard & Brian Lawton were talking about this today, and had Colorado not matched, not only would Calgary been out the 1st & 3rd, and O'Reilly, but they would have also been on the hook for the $2.5M signing bonus (which I assume would then have counted against Calgary's cap).

Stop it. Please. It's too much. Too much pain. From now on there will be no mention of this. Good? Good.

Avatar
#59 Luc
March 03 2013, 12:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

And one more thing...

Daren Millard & Brian Lawton were talking about this today, and had Colorado not matched, not only would Calgary been out the 1st & 3rd, and O'Reilly, but they would have also been on the hook for the $2.5M signing bonus (which I assume would then have counted against Calgary's cap).

That is ridiculous. Not your post but the rule itself. How can they have a rule that is so unique and rarely used, be THAT disastrous. I understand that's its main purpose is to deter signing European players but holy cow is that a poorly constructed portion of the CBA.

Avatar
#60 theartfuldodger
March 03 2013, 12:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Gilles is telling a fib... Or Vancouver discovered this after their offer that was turned down.. After seeing Gilles it has made wonder what the hell this is all about. I figure Gilles was saving face....

Avatar
#61 theartfuldodger
March 03 2013, 12:34AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@RossCreekNation

You got it dialed in!!

Avatar
#62 VK63
March 03 2013, 12:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Given all the negativity and questioning of the organizations competence and all the outside noise associated with this "debacle"

What shall redemption look like? Will they try and immediately save face and make a big splash of some sort in an effort to deflect criticism?

OR

who shall be the rebound girl?

Given their track record when supposedly fully supported, what sort of abysmal train wreck will they conjure up if Edwards actually puts the fire to their feet?

I shudder to think. And yet.... much like a car crash.... i find I can't look away.

Also. What did MacLean say about the matter? kind of curious in a half hearted way.

Avatar
#63 Stockley
March 03 2013, 07:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@VK63

I don't know if any of it even matters right now. The only thing we can count on is this franchise not doing the right thing. Nothing they have done in the last month makes any sense at all.

Sven Baertschi and Roman Cervenka might not be defensive gems or threats to win the Selke anytime soon; but they have shown some offensive flair in the 12 seconds a night Hartley deems them worthy of. They get to learn from watching Comeau screw up repeatedly and keep getting ice time. You know how much easier it is to learn from your mistakes by watching someone else screw up with no repercussions, right?

I saw both Irving and Taylor criticized for poor rebound control so they bring in Joey MacDonald who is just as bad or worse. Rather than sticking with your young goalies and hoping against hope they learn via experience; staple them to the bench next to Sven and Roman. They can all learn with their front row seats, right? I sort of feel bad for Irving. Since Darryl was chased out of town it seems like everyone is rooting against him. The minute he stumbles the organization shows complete lack of faith in him. This was a chance to force him to sink or swim. The clueless dolts in the press box still seem convinced this bunch can make the playoffs though, so god forbid you let a rookie learn from his mistakes. Crush his spirit instead. Almost feels like he was a Sutter mistake and they were only giving him a half-hearted shot to it didn't look like asset mismanagement. I'm not saying he looks like a future Vezina winner but I don't think he was handled properly at the NHL or AHL level the last two years.

That's an excellent way to attract talent in the future. Misuse and abuse the talent you have, force your prized Euro free agent watch from the bench. Force your prized rookie to do much the same. Play a goaltender carousel and settle on the 31 year old career backup/AHL starter who has never been able to get it done with numerous chances elsewhere.

In short; I don't get it. Then again in a quarter century of watching this team they've done little since '89 that makes sense. Why should I expect anything different?

Avatar
#64 negrilcowboy
March 03 2013, 08:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Whats next Uncle Feasta, you sign Iggy to another 7 yr 7 mill per deal with a no movement clause and he is player/coach too. Dreadful management. Agree if this was Dutter the fallout would be nuclear.

Avatar
#65 meat1
March 03 2013, 09:13AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'm pretty sure we can move away from our stabbing of Darryl Sutter now. He is far enough removed, and this current Hockey Operations Department has messed up MORE than its allowable amount already. By no means did I agree with everything Sutter did, and I agreed with virtually nothing towards the end, but Feaster and Company's free-pass priveledge of following him has ended. This is Feaster's mess now, and I know he won't be able to clean it up.

Avatar
#66 Kurt
March 03 2013, 09:38AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Stockley wrote:

I don't know if any of it even matters right now. The only thing we can count on is this franchise not doing the right thing. Nothing they have done in the last month makes any sense at all.

Sven Baertschi and Roman Cervenka might not be defensive gems or threats to win the Selke anytime soon; but they have shown some offensive flair in the 12 seconds a night Hartley deems them worthy of. They get to learn from watching Comeau screw up repeatedly and keep getting ice time. You know how much easier it is to learn from your mistakes by watching someone else screw up with no repercussions, right?

I saw both Irving and Taylor criticized for poor rebound control so they bring in Joey MacDonald who is just as bad or worse. Rather than sticking with your young goalies and hoping against hope they learn via experience; staple them to the bench next to Sven and Roman. They can all learn with their front row seats, right? I sort of feel bad for Irving. Since Darryl was chased out of town it seems like everyone is rooting against him. The minute he stumbles the organization shows complete lack of faith in him. This was a chance to force him to sink or swim. The clueless dolts in the press box still seem convinced this bunch can make the playoffs though, so god forbid you let a rookie learn from his mistakes. Crush his spirit instead. Almost feels like he was a Sutter mistake and they were only giving him a half-hearted shot to it didn't look like asset mismanagement. I'm not saying he looks like a future Vezina winner but I don't think he was handled properly at the NHL or AHL level the last two years.

That's an excellent way to attract talent in the future. Misuse and abuse the talent you have, force your prized Euro free agent watch from the bench. Force your prized rookie to do much the same. Play a goaltender carousel and settle on the 31 year old career backup/AHL starter who has never been able to get it done with numerous chances elsewhere.

In short; I don't get it. Then again in a quarter century of watching this team they've done little since '89 that makes sense. Why should I expect anything different?

Couldnt agree more. Play the kids, let them screw up and develop. But I'd say its clear this team wants to win still and isn't concerned win development over winning. It's a mentality shift that needs to take place and along with a few trades will lock up a lottery draft pick and forever alter the path of is team.

Not saying Edmonton did things right but they did use player development as a tool towards their suckery. They would roll lines and throw their kids out in all sorts of opportunities and it caused them to lose even more. The end result is a guy like Eberle who now can be trusted to lock things down defensively at 21 yrs old. So they developed prospects and because of it sucked and got more lottery picks.

I'm not sure this organization has the stomach for that. Do the fans?? I do!

Trade Iggy, trade Kipper, play the kids = Nate Mckinnon and a new bright future

Avatar
#67 Franko J
March 03 2013, 10:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
meat1 wrote:

I'm pretty sure we can move away from our stabbing of Darryl Sutter now. He is far enough removed, and this current Hockey Operations Department has messed up MORE than its allowable amount already. By no means did I agree with everything Sutter did, and I agreed with virtually nothing towards the end, but Feaster and Company's free-pass priveledge of following him has ended. This is Feaster's mess now, and I know he won't be able to clean it up.

Sutter has won his Stanley Cup. You're absolutely correct. Time to move on and see what Feaster has in mind for this team going forward. Like I said in the previous article on the offer sheet to Ryan O'Reilly:

"Desperate Times means Desperate Measures".

Right now this team is critically desperate for something good to happen or drastically change.

As a fan, the only question I have: Is Feaster the right GM to make this team competitive now and in the future?

Avatar
#68 Franko J
March 03 2013, 10:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
meat1 wrote:

I'm pretty sure we can move away from our stabbing of Darryl Sutter now. He is far enough removed, and this current Hockey Operations Department has messed up MORE than its allowable amount already. By no means did I agree with everything Sutter did, and I agreed with virtually nothing towards the end, but Feaster and Company's free-pass priveledge of following him has ended. This is Feaster's mess now, and I know he won't be able to clean it up.

Sutter has won his Stanley Cup. You're absolutely correct. Time to move on and see what Feaster has in mind for this team going forward. Like I said in the previous article on the offer sheet to Ryan O'Reilly:

"Desperate Times means Desperate Measures".

Right now this team is critically desperate for something good to happen or drastically change.

As a fan, the only question I have: Is Feaster the right GM to make this team competitive now and in the future?

Avatar
#69 RossCreekNation
March 03 2013, 10:09AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

RON HEXTALL, PLEASE.

Avatar
#70 Chris Fairfield
March 03 2013, 10:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

How does everyone feel about Saturday's forwards practice lines?

Saturday practice lines

Forwards: Tanguay - Stajan - Stempniak Hudler - Cervenka - Iginla Glencross - Cammalleri - Baertschi McGrattan - Comeau/Begin - Jackman

Avatar
#71 schevvy
March 03 2013, 10:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Danny Taylor starts in net tonight. That's a good start. Also Canucks won't be into Calgary until a few hours before the game because of the AWFUL Alberta weather.

Avatar
#72 Dino
March 03 2013, 10:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

RON HEXTALL, PLEASE.

I'm sure Steve Tambellini will be fired soon. Calgary can hire him to do the rebuild that is desperately needed. Tambo is great at getting 1st overall draft picks. Who can argue with 3 in a row. That ought to jump start the rebuild.

Avatar
#73 aloudoun
March 03 2013, 10:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Play Sven top 6 minutes!

Tanguay-Stajan-Iginla Sven-Cervenka-Hudler Glencross-Cammy-Stemps McGrattan - Comeau/Begin - Jackman

Avatar
#74 Subversive
March 03 2013, 10:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Sorry Kent, gotta disagree with you here. To make a move like this without confirmation from the league on the rule is indefensible. Feaster deserves to swing for it, kind of like how that Chicago GM did afew years back when he screwed up some RFA deadline.

Avatar
#75 Stockley
March 03 2013, 10:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@aloudoun

I'd love to see a Baertschi-Hudler-Cervenka line stick together for a few games. They're all very creative players. They might get manhandled a little physically, but that could have the added benefit of drawing penalties when other teams get stupid about it.

As much as I've mocked the trade for McGrattan, I do hope his presence dissuades some teams from taking liberties with our players.

Avatar
#76 Sincity1976
March 03 2013, 11:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Chris Fairfield

Does it matter what the lines are to start? I didn't think any coach could shuffle the lines more then Brent Sutter. But Hartley sure as heck has.

Baertschi has been on 5 different lines in his 8 games. How in the heck is a rookie supposed to acclimate to the NHL when the only thing resembling a routine line mate is Blake Comeau?

I am pretty sure the lines are formed each period with a Bingo machine.

We are 40% through the season and I challenge anyone to name a consistent forward line. Or even a consistent forward pairing. That is just plain silly.

Avatar
#77 schevvy
March 03 2013, 12:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Canucks not flying out until 2 MT. Hum...is it still snowing hard in Calgary? Cause they may not be able to get in.

Avatar
#78 mattyc
March 03 2013, 12:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Sincity1976

Stempniak - Glencross, Tanguay-Iginla (Stajan)

Avatar
#79 VK63
March 03 2013, 12:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

RON HEXTALL, PLEASE.

Since Dutter left, the Flames hierarchy (country club) has been a yes man enclave running through Ken King. The full barn validates their belief that all is well, the just missed position in the conference when the playoff starts validates a belief that they are "close". (delusional analysis ).

Hextall would be an excellent choice but I can't imagine King being entirely comfortable with an alpha male in the drivers seat. (again).

The only recourse available to disgruntled fans is to tell these bums to go f*ck themselves when the season seat renewal call comes.

Avatar
#80 Sincity1976
March 03 2013, 12:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@mattyc

Tanguay and Iginla have played a fair bit together (really the only duo). But not with Stajan. Glencross and Stempniak have sent more time apart then together.

The lines have been a mess. So have the positions. Most the forwards have played at least two forward positions. Many alternating between C and wing. Though that is more a product of the poor team build then the coach.

Avatar
#81 meat1
March 03 2013, 12:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

If you were to take your Flames jersey and hat off, and really look at how this team functions, it appears to me to be just like PLANES, TRAINS, and AUTOMOBILES. What a cast.....Jay Feaster as John Candy and Bob Hartley as Steve Martin. Kenneth King reminds me of the big gal at the car rental station babbling "gobbly, gobbly, gobbly" to Murray Edwards. The fans????? Well, we are the snarling dog in the back of the pickup truck.

Avatar
#82 Mullen Mania
March 03 2013, 12:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@mattyc

Glencross was originally paired with Iggy and Tanguay. Iginla spent some time on the third line. I would agree those pairings have been in place for a couple of weeks (maybe that is all you can hope for when the team wants to win and they're not getting it done). As of late Tanguay looks like he is fighting the puck at times (caveat that I did not see the last game).

I like the idea of seeing if Iggy can work effectively with Hudler and Cervenka. Might provide just enough grit to that line without losing skill. I do agree that I would like to see Sven start to get more minutes as he has been one of the best players of late.

Just please give us less Comeau!

Avatar
#83 mattyc
March 03 2013, 01:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Sincity1976

agreed that it's probably a construction thing - also probably a bit of an injury thing. Having Backlund and Baertschi out shifted things around a bit.

For reference:

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_time_on_ice_stats.php?ds=8&s=10&f1=2012_s&f2=5v5&f4=C+LW+RW&f5=CGY&c=0+1+3+5+8+7+9+10+11+12+13+14+15+16+17+18+19+20+21+22+23+24+25+26+27+28#

most common duo (by TOI %): Cervenka - Hudler (80%) Iggy-Tanguay (74.5%) Begin-Jackman (71%)

AND!

Alui-Comeau (100% - har har har!)

Avatar
#84 Joel
March 03 2013, 01:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

Mike Gillis on After Hours, when asked if he knew O'Reilly would have to go on waivers aftersigning an offersheet: "Yes."

In that interview, Gillis also made a reference to Lawrence Gilman, one of the Canucks execs and the one who is responsible for knowing the CBA inside and out to help manage (or manipulate if you prefer) the salary cap.

Does Calgary have a guy like that in the organization, or is Feaster doing it all himself when it comes to the CBA? If so, that is the guy who should be fired, for giving Feaster bad advice.

Avatar
#85 mattyc
March 03 2013, 01:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Mullen Mania

yep - my mistake... Glencross' most consistent linemate is Iginla (50% of 5v5) for reference Stempniak (39%).

Iginla Hudler Cervenka gives me nightmares, Hudler is the only one that knows what our d-zone looks like.

Avatar
#86 Joel
March 03 2013, 01:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Subversive wrote:

Sorry Kent, gotta disagree with you here. To make a move like this without confirmation from the league on the rule is indefensible. Feaster deserves to swing for it, kind of like how that Chicago GM did afew years back when he screwed up some RFA deadline.

That is the comparable I thought of, with Chicago screwing up the RFA offers, and then having to overpay to keep the NHLPA from grieving and making six of their good young players UFA. (Verteeg, Byfuglien, Bolland and a few others)

But he wasn't fired right away for it. Later CHI management used it as a reason when Bowman junior launched his coupe to take over as GM. (Guess who was the junior exec responsible for sending out those qualifying offers. Gotta love internal politics almost screwing over the entire team)

So I'd think Feaster is still there until the end of the season. And with another spring of no playoffs, this incident will be the nail in his coffin when management holds the press conference to announce his move to being a hockey advisor, etc

Avatar
#87 MC Hockey
March 03 2013, 01:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I have a tough time deciding on this one!

First, I love the move to get O'Reilly, as we need young talent that is top-notch in both effort/drive and results.

But the possible end result of losing the player AND the 1st & 3rd round 2013 picks would have been horrible. Mr. Feaster is a lawyer by trade so perhaps doing due diligence more completely would have made sense. Perhaps going for the dramatic move to make a splash was given too much emphasis here and Feaster lucked out the way it happened.

On the other hand, I think the NHL would have likely arbitrated this and it would have worked out for the Flames the way the above-noted Chicago situation did.

Avatar
#88 Bruins
March 03 2013, 01:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Just watching the Red Wings and the Blackhawks....what a great game. Both these teams have awesome GMs, the flames don't. The Flames have to play 60 minutes tonight or they will get hammered.

Avatar
#89 SmellOfVictory
March 03 2013, 01:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

And I'm not buying for a second that O'Reilly's agent didn't know he'd have to go on waivers.

Lowetide had an agent on his show Sat afternoon, and the agent carefully said that with the new CBA, and the MOU, he looked over anything that would affect his clients & that anything that didn't specifically affect his clients would be gone over this summer once he gets his hands on the official CBA documents. In other words, if he had a client that was a RFA playing in Europe, he (and every agent) would know everything that affectes his client.

Here's my theory: ROR's agent knew exactly what was up. There's a reason he abruptly left KHL 2 days after NHL season started - agent discovered gaffe, but not until it was too late. Got ROR to come back home & hope no one else would catch it & immediately went to work trying to get an offersheet before COL discovered the gaffe & eliminated that leverage. Process obv took longer than anticipated. Agent knew full well that ROR would never play with team he signed with; knew either a) COL would match, or b) he'd go on waivers & be claimed by CBJ. At that point, all agent could do for ROR was "show him the money" with knowledge he'd be playing in COL or CBJ. CGY & Feaster became the sucker. Ultimately, agent has to look out for # 1 - ROR. Sorry, CGY. Agent then claims to have not known so that he doesn't make himself or CGY look so bad. Got his player $$

That makes a great deal of sense.

Avatar
#90 Brick
March 03 2013, 04:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I wonder what Jay Feaster does next. Would Detroit give up one of their young centers for Giordano?

Comments are closed for this article.