Post by Eric - Washington GM on Aug 13, 2008 1:09:26 GMT -5
I've tried to catch up on all the threads and posts and instant messages sent regarding this issue. But, I felt I'd give Ken a night off on trying to simmer an issue.
To my understanding, here are some of the order of events.
MIN has decided only to qualify Mark Parrish. Thus giving him RFA status.
During this time, the thread involving Mark Parrish had some bids. One team had their bid(s) voided, the other was working around compensation issues. To MIN's knowledge the compensation had either met the standards or had been agreed upon.
Upon hearing that, MIN had progressed even further with trade talks. Trade talks that were counting Parrish off the books. MIN was counting on the current offer on Mark Parrish to be accepted. Even if the offer had been upped, his salary would be coming off of the MIN books.
MIN and COL worked out a trade, and had finalized the trade. The trade essentially put MIN over the cap. But, it was believed that Parrish's contract would not count against his cap, because Parrish was on his way out the door.
Failing to take into immediate consideration, MIN had not thought that he needed to wait the 48 hours to accept. And that this deal could go through, even though it was understood a Parrish' salary was already out the door.
In doing so, the current roster update had lead it to believe that MIN was over the cap. Essentially, he was. But, it was believed that Parrish would not count against the cap, because he was going to be signed as a RFA.
Mike Modano was then cast as a cap casualty because of MIN being over the cap.
During this off-season when a player was signed to a new team, putting that team over the cap - the player's contract was voided and he was put back on the open market. There wasn't a movement to take that team's highest paid player and release him into the current Free Agent Market. It was because the player was a new addition, and that his contract was then voided.
Going back in the past years, I remember that EDM had gone over the cap in the off-season. I believe it was because of a trade, but it could've very well been that there was a small window that we allowed teams to be over and Clint signed someone minor. Regardless, EDM was not forced to have their highest paid player released.
Getting back to the issue at hand. MIN wrongly had their player, Mike Modano, put into the UFA market tonight. Looking at it from this stance; If a team attempts to sign a player in the off-season that puts them over the cap, the player is released, the contract is voided, the team can't bid on that player again. If a team makes a trade in the off-season, the team does not have it's highest paid player released due to a cap casualty. If we're following the same precedent as signings, the trade would be voided. Or in this case, could be put on hold. I'm sure that MIN and COL could come to an understanding to wait a bit, and allow MIN ample time to complete the deal correctly and cap compliant.
I realize that's all a bit wordy, and I definitely beat to death some horses. But, I'm just trying to get a point across about the mistake of putting Modano on the open market. At the very least the trade is put on hold.
On another note, I would hope that everyone can take a step back and calm down about certain issues regarding signings and how everything is being handled. Please understand that Ken, Jordan and Bryce are doing their best to accommodate everyone and every situation. Please also understand that they are doing their best to walk home from work into situations on the board that they have to be caught up to speed on relatively quickly. Speaking as a commish, they understand that you take the league seriously. They appreciate it. Without dedicated GMs, they wouldn't take the time to work on keeping this league going. I think a majority of the GMs in here know that. Most people here have helped out in some way to lessen a load. We know what it takes to keep a season going.
I'd also like to think that people here wouldn't see this as a bias towards Bryce. I'd love nothing more than to bug him for a year about losing Modano. But, that ruling wouldn't be right. I'd like each and everyone of you to know that I would have typed word-for-word the same explanation and reasoning if you were in the same situation. This has to do with the principle and not the context of the situation.
Thanks.
To my understanding, here are some of the order of events.
MIN has decided only to qualify Mark Parrish. Thus giving him RFA status.
During this time, the thread involving Mark Parrish had some bids. One team had their bid(s) voided, the other was working around compensation issues. To MIN's knowledge the compensation had either met the standards or had been agreed upon.
Upon hearing that, MIN had progressed even further with trade talks. Trade talks that were counting Parrish off the books. MIN was counting on the current offer on Mark Parrish to be accepted. Even if the offer had been upped, his salary would be coming off of the MIN books.
MIN and COL worked out a trade, and had finalized the trade. The trade essentially put MIN over the cap. But, it was believed that Parrish's contract would not count against his cap, because Parrish was on his way out the door.
Failing to take into immediate consideration, MIN had not thought that he needed to wait the 48 hours to accept. And that this deal could go through, even though it was understood a Parrish' salary was already out the door.
In doing so, the current roster update had lead it to believe that MIN was over the cap. Essentially, he was. But, it was believed that Parrish would not count against the cap, because he was going to be signed as a RFA.
Mike Modano was then cast as a cap casualty because of MIN being over the cap.
During this off-season when a player was signed to a new team, putting that team over the cap - the player's contract was voided and he was put back on the open market. There wasn't a movement to take that team's highest paid player and release him into the current Free Agent Market. It was because the player was a new addition, and that his contract was then voided.
Going back in the past years, I remember that EDM had gone over the cap in the off-season. I believe it was because of a trade, but it could've very well been that there was a small window that we allowed teams to be over and Clint signed someone minor. Regardless, EDM was not forced to have their highest paid player released.
Getting back to the issue at hand. MIN wrongly had their player, Mike Modano, put into the UFA market tonight. Looking at it from this stance; If a team attempts to sign a player in the off-season that puts them over the cap, the player is released, the contract is voided, the team can't bid on that player again. If a team makes a trade in the off-season, the team does not have it's highest paid player released due to a cap casualty. If we're following the same precedent as signings, the trade would be voided. Or in this case, could be put on hold. I'm sure that MIN and COL could come to an understanding to wait a bit, and allow MIN ample time to complete the deal correctly and cap compliant.
I realize that's all a bit wordy, and I definitely beat to death some horses. But, I'm just trying to get a point across about the mistake of putting Modano on the open market. At the very least the trade is put on hold.
On another note, I would hope that everyone can take a step back and calm down about certain issues regarding signings and how everything is being handled. Please understand that Ken, Jordan and Bryce are doing their best to accommodate everyone and every situation. Please also understand that they are doing their best to walk home from work into situations on the board that they have to be caught up to speed on relatively quickly. Speaking as a commish, they understand that you take the league seriously. They appreciate it. Without dedicated GMs, they wouldn't take the time to work on keeping this league going. I think a majority of the GMs in here know that. Most people here have helped out in some way to lessen a load. We know what it takes to keep a season going.
I'd also like to think that people here wouldn't see this as a bias towards Bryce. I'd love nothing more than to bug him for a year about losing Modano. But, that ruling wouldn't be right. I'd like each and everyone of you to know that I would have typed word-for-word the same explanation and reasoning if you were in the same situation. This has to do with the principle and not the context of the situation.
Thanks.