It's probably better than I gave it credit for, yes. But it's not better than the SHL.Extraliga above the Swiss league ?
The current succes of Swiss players and Switzerland at the WC, should tell you something. That league has improved drastically over the years. Its just that people are not familiar with it.
How would he have shown interest? Unless there's something I don't know, the Kings never showed interest in him until Blake became GM.So much talk about a player who has shown zero interest in the NHL. Absolutely amazing.
It's probably better than I gave it credit for, yes. But it's not better than the SHL.
How would he have shown interest? Unless there's something I don't know, the Kings never showed interest in him until Blake became GM.
How do you know he hasn't shown any interest? How would he have shown interest? Who's penciling him in?And he hasn't shown any interest still. So why are people trying to pencil him in?
How do you know he hasn't shown any interest? How would he have shown interest? Who's penciling him in?
Eh, I've gotten my hopes up in the past when they brought in overage Europeans like Tomas Vlasak and Jaroslav Bednar, they didn't work out to the extent that Lubomir Visnovsky and Frantisek Kaberle did. Use Kubalik as trade bait to Carolina to acquire Jeff Skinner .
Dave Taylor really did like his Czech/Slovak contingency.
Haven't seen it posted yet, according to Capfriendly, it does appear like the Kings still own Kubalik's rights
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Kubalik is a very interesting case study.<br><br>- drafted in 2013 out of the OHL giving LA 2 yrs<br>- played 1 yr in the OHL<br>- left OHL for Europe after 1 yr in Junior extending the window to 4 yrs<br>- prior to 4 yr window expiring, went to NLA allowing LA to flag him as a defected player</p>— CapFriendly (@CapFriendly) <a href="">May 17, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">You're right, however per my understanding he agreed to join the NLA prior to the June 1 window expiring which allowed LA to file a grievance and flag him as defected. Ambrì-Piotta then loaned him back to the Czech league, and then he returned mid way through the 2017-18 season.</p>— CapFriendly (@CapFriendly) <a href="">May 17, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
I'm guessing because he originally defected to the Czech league?This is interesting. As far as I know the Swiss Hockey Association has signed onto the NHL-IIHF transfer agreement. So I don't know why that would make him defected. Only way I can see that is if Swiss is not apart of the transfer agreement. Which is possible I suppose.
I'm guessing because he originally defected to the Czech league?
I think the Kings liked the scouting of the gentleman doing the job in Eastern Europe to be more precise. Sorry, I can't remember his name off the top of my head.Eh, I've gotten my hopes up in the past when they brought in overage Europeans like Tomas Vlasak and Jaroslav Bednar, they didn't work out to the extent that Lubomir Visnovsky and Frantisek Kaberle did. Use Kubalik as trade bait to Carolina to acquire Jeff Skinner .
Dave Taylor really did like his Czech/Slovak contingency.
Just a guess but the Kings may have had Kubalik declared a defected player last summer when he signed with the KHL. He had reportedly signed a two year deal with Salavat Yulaev in May and then later in the summer had the contract dissolved.Defected has a specific use in the CBA. In this case he did not "defect". He left NA to head to Europe. This alone is not enough to be considered a "defected player".
There's basically 2 possibilities.
1) Is that Swiss has not signed the transfer agreement. Then this might be enough to gain rights indefinitely much like how players playing in Russia have their rights retained indefinitely (since Russia for sure never signed the transfer agreement). As far as I know the information on the transfer agreement is not widely available. I had thought that Russia was the only nation that had refused to sign it.
2) The Kings may have made the argument that the league change got them a defected player. I feel like this is something that would not hold up if Kubalik and his agent protested it in the CBA since it makes no mention of team just "to Europe". This feels like something the Kings argued and Kubalik didn't care enough to argue it, but should he attempt to come to NA something that he could easily get reversed.
These odd situations are usually decided by precedent. I can't think of any precedent's on this one. Possibility one would keep Kubalik's rights. Possibility two means that the second Kubalik decides to come to NA he could probably become an NHL UFA. Albeit a protest could be unsuccesful for sure as well. I just don't see what Kings could be pointing to in the CBA to make the move to "defected player" in the CBA just from a league change in possibility two. Other than Swiss not being in the transfer agreement.
Just a guess but the Kings may have had Kubalik declared a defected player last summer when he signed with the KHL. He had reportedly signed a two year deal with Salavat Yulaev in May and then later in the summer had the contract dissolved.
Can we put this thread to rest now?
Can we put this thread to rest now?