Capitals Qualify All Nine Restricted Free Agents

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 2:39 PM EDT

The Washington Capitals have extended qualifying offers to all nine of their Restricted Free Agents prior to this afternoon's 5:00 deadline. Per the team's site:

The list of players qualified is as follows: Jay Beagle, Chris Bourque, Eric Fehr, Tomas Fleischmann, Andrew Gordon, Boyd Gordon, Patrick McNeill, Zach Miskovic and Jeff Schultz. The first six players listed are forwards while the latter three are defensemen.

Washington qualified all nine of its restricted free agent players, and those players now have until July 15 to decide whether or not to accept the team’s offer.

Eight of the nine players – with McNeill being the lone exception – carry arbitration rights. Those eight players have until July 5 to file for arbitration. The NHL’s salary arbitration hearings will be conducted from July 20-Aug. 4 in Toronto.

Of note, any of Fehr, Fleischmann and Schultz could potentially do very well for himself in arbitration, so it will be very interesting to see how the team handles contract negotiations in the weeks ahead.

Tweet Comment 67 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

What happens if someone declines the offer or makes no decision by July 15?

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 2:47 PM EDT reply actions

If they reject, they’re still RFAs.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions

So rejection is pretty worthless? Does rejection mean GMGM can offer below the QO? I’m just wondering what the purpose of setting a rejection date is and what the upshot is for negotiating with RFAs.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions

If they reject the QO, they can try to get an offer sheet from another team.

"Ovechkin, what is good in life?"

"To crush your enemies. To see them driven before you. And to hear the lamentations of their captain."

by Wheeler on Jun 28, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions

But why the July 15 deadline? They could pursue an offer sheet on July 2.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

An offer stands open until rejected or withdrawn. I’m sure that they can reject the QO earlier if they want. I suppose that the deadline is in there so that an RFA can’t wait around through the off-season for an offer sheet and then take the QO if he gets nothing better.

"Ovechkin, what is good in life?"

"To crush your enemies. To see them driven before you. And to hear the lamentations of their captain."

by Wheeler on Jun 28, 2010 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions

yes. Flash didn’t accept his QO a while back and the Caps were able to sign him for even less.

#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.

by RedBirdie on Jun 28, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions

So why would you ever reject?

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Because he’s not smart and thought he was worth more than his QO? Gambled and lost.

"It's always good to have vikings."

by gfcaps fan on Jun 28, 2010 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Or he wanted a different contract. Some guys at certain points in their careers would prefer a one-way deal at a lower NHL salary than a two-way deal at more NHL money. For example, a guy who might be a 50/50 shot to spend most of the year in the NHL might reject a two-way QO with a $750,000 NHL salary and $200,000 AHL salary and prefer a one-way deal worth $650k.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions

If you accept, then you’re signed to a contract. He must have wanted more time to fish for RFA offers.

Atta dinnin stick a who!

by Gould Old Days on Jun 28, 2010 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions

So the date is for GMs so they know what money they are liable for. If the RFA could go to September with the QO then it hurts your ability to fill other holes/sign other players?

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Should it be considered interesting that the Caps didn’t negotiate a contract extension earlier with Jeff Schultz (like they did with Backstrom?) Or is a QO sufficient for their (at present) top-pairing defenseman?

by EmilyB on Jun 28, 2010 2:49 PM EDT reply actions

They may have been trying but failed, then the QO holds his rights so they can keep trying.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m sure they’re working on something with some of these guys – don’t want to let an arbitrator decide what you’re going to pay your guy.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Okay, I get it. Like the reports that the Caps were negotiating a multi-year with Fehr. But no actual K yet, so they QO and keep talking.

by EmilyB on Jun 28, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions

ok, so remind me of the process. guys can accept their QO’s , which mean a one year deal and then they become ? (RFA’s UFA’s). they can go to arb and have the arbitor decide their value in which case the team can decline and they can become UFA’s. if the team accepts then its a one year deal and the player would become a UFA after that? the two parties could also negotiate a long term deal…

Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...

by dcsportsfan1 on Jun 28, 2010 2:49 PM EDT reply actions

The UFA qualifying age is 27 as of (I think) July 1, so they’ll all remain RFAs if they accept the QOs and don’t file for arb.

Look at this signature line. Notice the lack of spelling errors and self-whoring?

by Bald Pollack on Jun 28, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions

I think that can at times be older based on how many games a player has on his entry level deal (and possibly when he signs the EL deal).

Choking since 1985.

by macvechkin on Jun 28, 2010 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions

And accepting an arb deal doesn’t necessarily make you a UFA afterwards. The regular RFA/UFA rules are in effect. So, for example, ShaMo won his arb hearing one year and accepted his QO the next year without going to arb again (if I remember that correctly)

Atta dinnin stick a who!

by Gould Old Days on Jun 28, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions

If a player elects arbitration, the team can say “no” correct? And that would trigger UFA status?

#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.

by RedBirdie on Jun 28, 2010 2:54 PM EDT reply actions

Here‘s a decent primer that’ll answer a lot of questions.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 2:54 PM EDT reply actions

interesting note about what is and is not allowed in an arbitration hearing:

Evidence that is not admissible:

Testimonials, video and media reports.

does that mean rink wraps are not admissable? is the rink considered “media reports”

Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...

by dcsportsfan1 on Jun 28, 2010 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions

hmmmm, but smakedowns are apparently kosher.

#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.

by RedBirdie on Jun 28, 2010 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

The scope of what is admissible is pretty narrow, which lends a certain benefit to the teams. The actual number of players that an RFA can be compared to is a pretty thin pool, and since they can only be compared to other RFAs, they are compared entirely to players other GMs are trying to retain on the cheap.

The discussion of the arbitration process in the CBA starts on page 52, and is actually a pretty interesting read. I kinda wonder if the GMs need to sit down and make flow charts to keep this stuff straight.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jun 28, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions

The big misconception, I find, is in “comparables,” since they are very narrowly defined – have to compare what guys did in their platform years, etc.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions

When I read the RFA and Arbitration sections of the CBA, the teams actually have the deck stacked substantially in their favor. But considering the way the CBA is written, the arbitrator has huge latitude in making his decision.

My favorite:

the overall contribution of the Player to the success or failure of his Club in the preceding season.

Flash put up 23 goals and 51 points and +9 last season. That contributed to regular season success. Through 6 playoff games, he tallied 1 assist and was a -1. That contributed to post season failure. How you weigh those conflicting contributions has a big impact on what you believe a guy’s salary should be.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jun 28, 2010 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions

I’d look at the fact that without Flash’s goals we’d still be the highest scoring team.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Whooooooaaaa

Big point here:

If the original team chooses to accept, or "match" the offer sheet, the player cannot be traded for one year.

Wasn’t the whole thing with Kessel that TOR couldn’t offer sheet him because BOS would match and trade him? This changes the entire dynamic. If TOR had offer sheeted Kessel then they locked BOS into either TOR or BOS having Kessel. I wish someone would have highlighted this last year because I remember a lot of discussion about BOS’ leverage being centered on the fact that they could match an offer and negotiate a better trade.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions

I think the concern was that if Kessel accepted the offer, the Bruins could/would trade his rights to someone else who would match, rather than match and then trade him.

by David Getz on Jun 28, 2010 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions

So you can trade the rights during the 7 day match window?

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Why not?

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions

It just seems like the team is pretty locked in. You can’t re-open negotiations so it’s mostly a take it or leave it situation.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Well, that’s exactly what it is – match or fold.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions

But you can trade to someone else to decide to match or fold.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Right – you can assign your rights in a player (which at that point are shit or get off the pot) to another team.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions

At least that’s my understanding.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah, I’m just trying to clarify everything. That makes sense.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Actually, if I understand your question correctly, I don’t think the original team can trade the players rights once an offer sheet has been signed according to section 10.3(a) of the CBA.

The Prior Club, within seven (7) days after the date it receives the Offer Sheet,
may exercise or not exercise its Right of First Refusal, which shall have the legal
consequence set forth below. Once an Offer Sheet for a Restricted Free Agent has been
received by the Prior Club, the Prior Club may not Trade or otherwise Assign its Right of
First Refusal for such Restricted Free Agent.

I may just be misunderstanding the question you asked, though, and if so please disregard…

by MB_10 on Jun 28, 2010 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 7 recs

Nope, that’s exactly what I was asking. Seems like Burke should have known that when BOS was trying to exert leverage.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Huh. How about that. Good work gets rec’d.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Some teams qualified their players late last week. GMGM made it clear he was going to qualify everyone. Is waiting until the deadline just because they can, or because they might be trying to get deals done before then?

"It's always good to have vikings."

by gfcaps fan on Jun 28, 2010 2:59 PM EDT reply actions

Is there any way to find out how much those offers are?

by CarltonBanks on Jun 28, 2010 3:03 PM EDT reply actions

Players who earned less than $660,000 in the previous season must be offered 110 percent of last season’s salary. Players making up to $1 million must be offered 105 percent. Players making over $1 million must be offered 100 percent.

From the link J.P. posted above

www.wiseadvertising.com

Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.

by Sombrero Guy on Jun 28, 2010 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions

Damn, two seconds from clicking on ‘Post’.

Look at this signature line. Notice the lack of spelling errors and self-whoring?

by Bald Pollack on Jun 28, 2010 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions

you weren’t the only one.

#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.

by RedBirdie on Jun 28, 2010 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions

When they say “must be offered” do they mean “must be offered AT LEAST”?

As in,… if they REALLY wanted to make sure they locked someone down, they could go a little high?

by Brainumbc on Jun 28, 2010 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions

They can negotiate a contract other than the QO at any time.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Excellent. Then it’s not too early to offer Flash a 1 year contract to clean my bathroom monthly then ey?

by Brainumbc on Jun 28, 2010 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions

If you read the actual 2005 CBA, you’ll find the rule is that a QO be “at least” equal to certain criteria depending on income level and type of contract (one way or two way).

I haven’t played out all the scenarios in my head, but it may well make sense to do so if you have a player who might receive an offer sheet if they don’t accept the QO.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jun 28, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions

If you read the actual 2005 CBA

I think I tried once. I looked at the first page and then gouged my eyeballs.

by Brainumbc on Jun 28, 2010 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions

I have a long flight tomorrow… I’m gonna try and read most of it. I’m pretty well versed in the NBA and NFL CBA’s, but the NHL’s is a somewhat different animal.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jun 28, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Trying to read it was like trying to read my 500 page terms of service agreement from Comcast

by Brainumbc on Jun 28, 2010 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions

You know they have your soul now… its ok they have mine too

by MetalCap on Jun 28, 2010 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions

What sucks is that Verizon doesn’t even offer as much as crappy DSL where I live. Comcast doesn’t know that yet thank god. So now that my contract is month to month, I call comcast every few months telling them I’m dropping them and they keep lowering my price. heh..

by Brainumbc on Jun 29, 2010 8:25 AM EDT up reply actions

I was confused on the actual nature of the qualifing offer, it just retains the rights, not an actual negotiation.

by CarltonBanks on Jun 28, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions

The QO Has Two Purposes:

1) For the team it has the purpose of retaining a player as an RFA. If there is no QO made, then the player becomes a UFA

2) It ensures that a team can’t low-ball a player because they had a year filled with injuries. That way a guy making 800K in 2009-10 who missed 65 games with an upper body injury would have to be offered 840K by the team if they wanted to keep him as an RFA.

It’s designed to be a way to prevent a team from “punishing” a player for missing games due to injury or illness.

I suspect all of the QOs were for the minimum they had to be, and that several players won’t be accepting them and negotiations will continue. For the borderline/minor leaguers, they’ll probably be accepted because once the offer is rejected, the team can withdraw it and offer less…

Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy

by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 28, 2010 4:00 PM EDT reply actions

So who would be the most missed if there was at least one who we couldn’t come to terms with.

I’d say #1 Shultz

by Brainumbc on Jun 28, 2010 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions

No doubt, it’s Schultz. Then Fehr. Those are the only two guys that would really hurt, IMO. After that you have Flash and the Gordons.

by grapejoos on Jun 28, 2010 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

The nerd in me has to rec something that has “Flash and the Gordons”…. I am such a sci-fi geek.

Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy

by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 29, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Me, too. Even though there’s no compensating Ming of Mongo.

Rocking the Red since 1975

by CapsFan75 on Jun 30, 2010 7:04 AM EDT up reply actions

Yep, Schultz would hurt.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on Jun 28, 2010 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions

First time he ever hurt anything!

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs

*

Except himself.

I waited all year for this?

by Rob Parker on Jun 28, 2010 7:26 PM EDT up reply actions

If they could find a way to transplant some of Chimera’s or Erskine’s mean streak into Schultz, that’d make for one bad-ass hockey player.

Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy

by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 29, 2010 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m pretty sure some Pavelek pride was hurt on that cross-rink goal.

Winterion Game Studios
Visit us online at : http://winterion.com

by winterion on Jun 29, 2010 3:22 AM EDT up reply actions

Sarge has got to be the top loss if he isn’t resigned. He’s a top pair defenseman on a lot of teams as the steadying guy who is paired with the top offensive d-man…. like Reekie to Gonchar back in the day, but without Joe’s “This ain’t no opera” mean streak. Plus, believe it or not, Schultz scores goals more frequently than Reekie did. Sarge pots 2 or 3 a year, Reekie scored at the same rate as Erskine.

That Reekie was able to have a high plus-minus, even when the Caps were pretty bad (such as 1998-99) speaks well of him.

Fehr would be #2 on the list. He’s a solid 3rd liner who could play 2nd line on some teams in the Brooks Laich role.

After that, take your pick among Fleischmann, Gordon and Gordon (grapejoos beat me to the reference…)

Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy

by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 29, 2010 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Southeast Standings

	GP	W	L	OTL	PT
Florida Litter Box Cats	55	27	17	11	65
Washington Japers' Rink	55	28	22	5	61
Winnipeg Arctic Ice Hockey	57	26	25	6	58
Tampa Bay Raw Charge	55	24	25	6	54
Carolina Canes Country	56	20	25	11	51