Compensatory Draft Selection for Cherepanov?
- Thread starter MortUWary
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Cherry is not "again eligible for the Entry Draft or becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent".
Also, don't think too much about what you wrote in the 3rd paragraph. There is absolutely nothing wrong with talking about the hockey effects of Cherepanovs passing. I think many many Rangerfans, all over the world, will remember and think of Cherepanov 15-20 years from now. But the tradgey of it all can't result in that nobody can discuss the Rangers hockey position. Like when the draft comes, fans should be able to talk about the lack of scoring threats in the organization. Hockeys Future should be able to list lack of scoring wingers as a "weakness" when they rank the prospects of the organizations. Its not like anyone would "honor" Cherepanov by pretending that he is still alive.
Also, don't think too much about what you wrote in the 3rd paragraph. There is absolutely nothing wrong with talking about the hockey effects of Cherepanovs passing. I think many many Rangerfans, all over the world, will remember and think of Cherepanov 15-20 years from now. But the tradgey of it all can't result in that nobody can discuss the Rangers hockey position. Like when the draft comes, fans should be able to talk about the lack of scoring threats in the organization. Hockeys Future should be able to list lack of scoring wingers as a "weakness" when they rank the prospects of the organizations. Its not like anyone would "honor" Cherepanov by pretending that he is still alive.
rebel diamond
Registered User
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
It is sad but in the end all drafts are gambles and sadly one of those gambles is that a prospect could die. Just ask the Boston Celtics about Len Bias. In the end, as cold hearted as it is, the Rangers lost this pick much like if a player decides not to come to NA or is a bust just a lot sader.
UpGoesRupp
Registered User
I don't want to start anything. Please correct me if i'm to far off track. But didn't Cherry have Ischemia?
If so, wouldn't that have been looked over in the NHL combine and by way of default land another pick for the Rangers. Now, i don't want to get in a big debate because it was the sad end that Cherepanov went down with an ambulance and proper medical care available.
Sorry, Hm. I was wondering if the NHL combine missed the diagnosis? and if they were to would that compensate a team. In any situation.
RIP Cherepanov
If so, wouldn't that have been looked over in the NHL combine and by way of default land another pick for the Rangers. Now, i don't want to get in a big debate because it was the sad end that Cherepanov went down with an ambulance and proper medical care available.
Sorry, Hm. I was wondering if the NHL combine missed the diagnosis? and if they were to would that compensate a team. In any situation.
RIP Cherepanov
Last edited:
mouser
Business of Hockey
Seeing as there's no past precedent for the league to compensate a team in this fashion it would seem unlikely.
My interpretation of the above cited clause is that the Rangers get the pick, if the transfer agreement issue is resolved.
They can still tender an offer, he just is now unable to accept it
.To clarify, I expect it to be treated as if he were still alive and just chose to not sign the Bona Fide Offer.
Still, the issue remains whether his rights lapse per the Transfer Agreement this draft or never. If the rights would have lapsed this draft, the Rangers will get pick #47 in 2009.
UpGoesRupp
Registered User
Thanks for the opinion. On a side note. Big ups to the KHL for showing a lot of emotions for the tradgedy. I.e. naming the Rookie of the Year trophy after the late Alexei Cherepanov. The fashion in which it happened is very sad.
Ted Hoffman
Done
- Dec 15, 2002
- 29,289
- 8,728
Russeltown
Registered User
MortUWary
Registered Loser
- Jul 19, 2007
- 1,252
- 27
Buffaloed
webmaster
I believe the NHL will invoke commission discretion and a comp pick will be awarded. The NHLPA and other teams won't even think about contesting it.
stu the grim reaper
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2002
- 1,281
- 8
the idea is outrageous! life happens. there is no compensation.
you cant just postulate whether or not a contract/transfer wouldve been worked out had things transpired differently...the young man's career ended. thats the end of it.
you cant just postulate whether or not a contract/transfer wouldve been worked out had things transpired differently...the young man's career ended. thats the end of it.
MortUWary
Registered Loser
- Jul 19, 2007
- 1,252
- 27
If the player has a career-ending injury and the team held that player's draft rights never had an opportunity to sign the player, the same question would and should be brought up.
Not to take off on Bluenote13's mention of Luc Bourdon, but he was a player who turned pro, was already signed by Vancouver and had a handful of NHL games under his belt at the time of his tragic passing. Vancouver wouldn't be entitled to draft compensation, just as Philly wasn't eligible for anything when Pelle Lindburgh passed on, but you should be able to ask the question in the case of an amateur who was drafted, but lost their life or had a career-ending injury. The team used a draft pick and wasn't able (because of unfortunate or tragic circumstances) to sign the player.
It's just a question of interpretation of the NHL's Collective Bargaining Agreement. I'm not trying to start trouble, but I feel (as do others who were at the Rangers game with me on Monday night) that it's a intriguing question to raise.
But there IS compensation for 1st round prospects who don't get signed.
Playing first year law student with this, the elements for who receives compensation are:
1) a Club loses its draft rights to an Unsigned Draft Choice
2) drafted in the first Round
3) except as a result of failing to tender a required Bona Fide Offer
4) who is again eligible for the Entry Draft or becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent
Cherepanov, Bourdon, and Wheeler (old CBA, but just as an example) are all very different sutations.
Wheeler:
1) a Club loses its draft rights to an Unsigned Draft Choice - Coyotes did lose their draft rights
2) drafted in the first Round - was drafted in the first round
3) except as a result of failing to tender a required Bona Fide Offer - Coyotes did tender a Bona Fide Offer, Wheeler did not sign
4) who is again eligible for the Entry Draft or becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent - became an UFA
Thus, Coyotes were compensated
Bourdon:
1) a Club loses its draft rights to an Unsigned Draft Choice - Canucks did NOT lose their draft rights
2) drafted in the first Round - was drafted in the first round
3) except as a result of failing to tender a required Bona Fide Offer - Canucks did tender a Bona Fide Offer, Bourdon signed
4) who is again eligible for the Entry Draft or becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent - did not become an UFA or reenter the draft
If Cherepanov was from the US (or Canada) and the situation played out the exact same (tragic) way, the Rangers would get the compensation without any question. BUT, the first and fourth elements may be problematic because of the transfer agreement... it is possible the Rangers would not lose their draft rights which would defeat the compensation claim. So:
Cherepanov:
1) a Club loses its draft rights to an Unsigned Draft Choice - depending on how the transfer agreement is interpreted, the Rangers either (a) lose their rights if Cherepanov remains unsigned, or (b) they retain them indefinitely. If the answer would be (a) if Cherepanov was live the Rangers would get the compensation
2) drafted in the first Round - Chere was a first round pick
3) except as a result of failing to tender a required Bona Fide Offer - Rangers did tender a Bona Fide Offer
4) who is again eligible for the Entry Draft or becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent - depending on how the transfer agreement is interpreted, Cherepanov either (a) returns to the draft, or (b) remains Rangers property indefinitely. If (a) the Rangers get compensation
I think the situation plays out with the Rangers receiving the pick in the 2009 draft, but it is terrible compensation both in terms of the talent Cherepanov was and that his life was lost to bring about the compensation.
ZDH
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2008
- 9,263
- 4,463
Actually, there would be no question.
If a player:
1) had a career-ending injury before he was signed to an NHL contract (EDIT: note, he must have been offered a contract he did not sign)
2) was drafted in the first round
3) and was from either Canada, the U.S., or a transfer agreement country...
All of the elements outlined in the paragraph above are met. There is no question the team who drafted him would receive a compensatory pick.
MortUWary
Registered Loser
- Jul 19, 2007
- 1,252
- 27
I appreciate the backup, but there was actually a stipulation with Wheeler's situation on signing the player by his college graduation year, whereby the Coyotes had 4 years to sign him. There are more gray areas with Cherepanov, due to the lack of a transfer agreement with Russia and a different timeline for players to become UFAs. Being as Wheeler had a 4 year window, as a result of going to a US College, the parameters were defined.
I'm aware of that I was just using Wheeler as an example... for my purposes ignore the old-CBA new-CBA issue, because they dealt primairily with his UFA/draft re-entry status. For college born players it was 4 years (ie: time needed to graduate). For European players in this CBA, the term is 2 years (which would make the pick 2009.
The issue is there are two conflicting clauses. One deals with countries that sign the transfer agreement, one deals with countries that do not sign.
The problem is, there was a transfer agreement with Russia, but it lapsed. The question is, do they use the clause for countries that signed the transfer agreement, or the one for no transfer agreement.
Using the no transfer agreement clause would mean Cherepanov becomes an UFA (EDIT: sorry, I mean reenters the draft).
Using the transfer agreement clause would mean Cherepanov remains Rangers property indefinitely.
***The difference old CBA vs. this CBA for Wheeler was that under the old CBA (which was followed) he became an UFA, under the current CBA a player would reenter the draft.
EDIT: Situation with Frolik this summer was almost similar. Had Frolik not signed before the deadline, he would have reentered the draft and the Panthers would have received a compensatory pick. Frolik signed a day or so before the deadline averting the situation.
mouser
Business of Hockey
From a purely legal standpoint, the wording on #1 could be an obstacle also.
Being deceased, could Cherepanov meet either of those conditions?
p.s. Obviously the NHL has leeway to interpret this clause, just pointing out the language.
As a rangerfan I hope you are right. A 2nd round pick wouldn't hurt.
But, gooing strict by the wording -- Cherry won't meet the criterias for beeing eligble for the entry draft or to become a UFA.
