TSN: Senators lose 1st round pick in '24, '25 or '26 as penalty for Dadonov fiasco

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Vegas seems to have been saying they suffered a loss financially. I wonder if Vegas gets compensated by the NHL. I suspect some secret deals have been made.

Pretty sure that's wiped out by that fancy Cup banner hanging in the rafters.

I get that Ottawa/Dorion was crappy here and screwed over a minor trade, but holy hell. Considering they got Stone for pennies on the dollar, got a contending expansion franchise on a sweetheart (expansion draft) deal from the NHL, and got a host of other freebies over the years (awards ceremonies, all star games, etc)....it's at a point they're just being greedy.

 

[HSF]

Vegas seems to have been saying they suffered a loss financially. I wonder if Vegas gets compensated by the NHL. I suspect some secret deals have been made.

Dorion lied. Its been hinted at many times. They asked Dorion what happened and they later found out that they were misled or their findings didnt line up

the NHL is not taking a 1st from Andlauer unless they absolutely had to.

 

[Mark Stones Spleen]

Do you think we should put Pierre in the ring of honor? Maybe the league will send him his Stanley Cup ring, in advance.

I think he did such a good job that we're going to retire the name "Pierre".

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Have you not been paying attention to who and what musk is?

Yes, know who and what he’s done, so far, in his life.

what issues do you have with him?

 

[Relapsing]

Yes, know who and what he’s done, so far, in his life.

what issues do you have with him?

Many. So, so many issues dude.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

Many. So, so many issues dude.

Next topic.... we aren't getting into politics.

Thank you

 

[Relapsing]

Next topic.... we aren't getting into politics.

Thank you

LOL. Fair

 

[dumbdick]

I kind of want the team to just sacrifice this year's as long as it's out of the top 7 or so. Move past it so we dont dwell on it and don't risk another byram situation where we risk it being a very high lottery pick.

 

[Sun God Nika]

I kind of want the team to just sacrifice this year's as long as it's out of the top 7 or so. Move past it so we dont dwell on it and don't risk another byram situation where we risk it being a very high lottery pick.

Technically we already are in a Byram situation.

The Sens handled their last Byram situation perfectly. If the sens are in a position to draft top 5 in 2026 there are far bigger concerns to be angry about than a first round pick.

The team is playing under DJ smith this year its the best our pick is going to be for a while we should keep it.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Depends how deep this draft is. If it's like a 2003 type year, I'd hold on to it.

If it's 1996 quality...woof. Let it goooooo.

 

[Bileur]

Dorion lied. Its been hinted at many times. They asked Dorion what happened and they later found out that they were misled or their findings didnt line up

the NHL is not taking a 1st from Andlauer unless they absolutely had to.

Doesn’t the consensus from insiders saying it wouldn’t be a first and the subsequent surprise that it was that harsh suggest that the NHL didn’t absolutely have to take a first from the sens?

A lower punishment was floated and people seemed to think it was reasonable.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

I could see the NHL throwing the Senators a bone at the draft and letting them give up the Boston pick if the Senators still own it come the deadline to declare.

They revised the punishment with New Jersey, where the punishment was later revised with new ownership in mind. The Boston pick is trending to be in the 25-32 type range. It's still a steep punishment, but they would be throwing Ottawa a bone.

Also, Ottawa owned the pick at the time the ruling was issued. So it wouldn't be a scenario where they Senators traded back knowing they could give up a worse pick.

It would be a reasonable compromise to let Ottawa give up the Boston pick.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

I kind of want the team to just sacrifice this year's as long as it's out of the top 7 or so. Move past it so we dont dwell on it and don't risk another byram situation where we risk it being a very high lottery pick.

The prospect pool is not very deep, and the window to win something is the next few years while the core players cap hits are below market value. A top 10 pick this year might get them someone who will come in on their ELC at the tail-end of this 5 or so year window. That would be tremendously valuable.

I agree with the sentiment about giving up the pick to gain cost certainty, but only if the pick is in a spot where they aren't going to get a top 10 talent. It would probably have to be a playoff pick, which unfortunately, it's almost certainly not going to be.

Draft quality aside, because I don't know how each of these drafts stack up, next year is the year you consider giving up a pick in the 6-10 range. If the Senators don't make the playoffs in 2024-25, we're probably in for another rebuild where we sell off most of the talent, or at the very least a major retool because this group would have failed to make the playoffs 3 years in a row after the rebuild was supposed to be over.

In which case, they cannot be without the 2026 pick because it's going to be high. So even if the 2025 pick is 6-10, they need to move it for the cost certainty. Similar to what people suggested they do with the 4th overall pick because while Filip Zadina was a sure-fire top 6 forward, the pick the next year was almost certainly going to be just as high, but could also be Jack Hughes.

 

[BondraTime]

New ownership in Jersey came 3 years after the decision had been made on their punishment. Not to mention that Kovalchuk retiring in year 3 was one of the main reasons for things being looked at years later.

New ownership for the Sens was already in place for the punishment given, the NHL has already accounted for new ownership with the punishment they have handed out.

The punishment is the punishment, sucks but everything was already known and on the table here with regards to ownership

 

[GCK]

New ownership in Jersey came 3 years after the decision had been made on their punishment. Not to mention that Kovalchuk retiring in year 3 was one of the main reasons for things being looked at years later.

New ownership for the Sens was already in place for the punishment given, the NHL has already accounted for new ownership with the punishment they have handed out.

The punishment is the punishment, sucks but everything was already known and on the table here with regards to ownership

The punishment is completely unfair. There was 1 person left from the incident, Dorion. What they done is punish the new ownership and the fans. The proper punishment was a fine equivalent to the sale clause and a long suspension of Dorion.

 

[BondraTime]

The punishment is completely unfair. There was 1 person left from the incident, Dorion. What they done is punish the new ownership and the fans. The proper punishment was a fine equivalent to the sale clause and a long suspension of Dorion.

Agreed, punishment was steep.

That isn't going to change though, that punishment was made with the knowledge that their was new ownership in place.

Jersey's punishment was handed down in 2010, new ownership came in 2013, Kovalchuk retired in 2013.

 

[Flamingo]

Agreed, punishment was steep.

That isn't going to change though, that punishment was made with the knowledge that their was new ownership in place.

Jersey's punishment was handed down in 2010, new ownership came in 2013, Kovalchuk retired in 2013.

Does not compute.

Jersey's sale valuation would have included the financial impact of losing the 1st round pick. Andlauer's argument was that the NHL and Sens BOG were happy to minimize his impression of the anticipated punishment to keep the sale valuation high.

The argument that the punishment would have been more severe had ownership been consistent from infraction to punishment doesn't change the fact that Andleur's impression that losing a 1st even with the 3-year-option is much steeper than he was led to believe.

 

[BondraTime]

Does not compute.

Jersey's sale valuation would have included the financial impact of losing the 1st round pick. Andlauer's argument was that the NHL and Sens BOG were happy to minimize his impression of the anticipated punishment to keep the sale valuation high.

The argument that the punishment would have been more severe had ownership been consistent from infraction to punishment doesn't change the fact that Andleur's impression that losing a 1st even with the 3-year-option is much steeper than he was led to believe.

So the price included the valuation of losing the 1st, which they then were given back?

Of course it does. It was steeper than he was led to believe, the large majority of that falls on the Sens BOG, and Dorion, who was involved in all of those meetings. They are the ones, not the NHL, to inform the buying party what's possibly coming down the pipeline. The NHL is guiding along the sale.

Andlauer can certainly think that, and that's more than fair. It is obviously true that the punishment was harsher than he was led to believe. They obviously talked about that and bartered for a week or two prior to the announcement where it was known. But using New Jersey as an example as what may happen because of ownership doesn't work, because that was done due to:

1. A New ownership group coming in 3 years after the punishment
2. A player retiring from the contract that caused the punishment 9 years early.

Sens punishment will hopefully get scaled back, but that will have nothing to do with why Jersey's got scaled back; new ownership and an anomaly retirement 3 years later. It would need to be an "NHL f***ed up and punished the Sens too harshly", which I don't think is very likely

 

[dredeye]

I guess having the option for one of the three years makes it a bit better, but still f***ing atrocious.

Also Martian basically hinted that Chiarelli is the next GM (or at least coming in) after Dorion gets fired. So that should be fun.

You better hope not.

 

[maclean]

ffs i saw this at the top of the feed and for a split second my brain was like "wait what another one?" and it was actually somehow believable

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Wait as long as possible to surrender the pick, by that time the pick should be much lower than next spring…. And allows for more time to appeal and a possible reduction of the penalty

 

[BankStreetParade]

So the Knights estimated their losses because of this botched trade at up to $1M and the NHL decided that the punishment that fit that loss was a first round draft pick? Either the NHL doesn't understand the monetary value of a draft pick or they were so punitive in their punishment that it's beyond the norm.

 

[Micklebot]

So the price included the valuation of losing the 1st, which they then were given back?

Of course it does. It was steeper than he was led to believe, the large majority of that falls on the Sens BOG, and Dorion, who was involved in all of those meetings. They are the ones, not the NHL, to inform the buying party what's possibly coming down the pipeline. The NHL is guiding along the sale.

Andlauer can certainly think that, and that's more than fair. It is obviously true that the punishment was harsher than he was led to believe. They obviously talked about that and bartered for a week or two prior to the announcement where it was known. But using New Jersey as an example as what may happen because of ownership doesn't work, because that was done due to:

1. A New ownership group coming in 3 years after the punishment
2. A player retiring from the contract that caused the punishment 9 years early.

Sens punishment will hopefully get scaled back, but that will have nothing to do with why Jersey's got scaled back; new ownership and an anomaly retirement 3 years later. It would need to be an "NHL f***ed up and punished the Sens too harshly", which I don't think is very likely

Andlauer's beef with the NHL is they needlessly delayed administering the punishment until after the sale concluded, the NHL absolutely f***ed up unless they have a damn good reason for it taking more than a year to figure out, especially since they new an ownership change was coming.

It took the league less than 2 months to figure out and hand down a punishment for the Kovalchuk contract. It took them 18 months to figure out what to do about the Sens.

When the Coyotes got caught testing ahead of the combine, it was investigated in January, Bettman got testimony from implicated staff in Aug, and the punishment was doled out later that same month. It took close to a year after hearing testimony from sens staff to hand out punishment.

 

[BondraTime]

Andlauer's beef with the NHL is they needlessly delayed administering the punishment until after the sale concluded, the NHL absolutely f***ed up unless they have a damn good reason for it taking more than a year to figure out, especially since they new an ownership change was coming.

It took the league less than 2 months to figure out and hand down a punishment for the Kovalchuk contract. It took them 18 months to figure out what to do about the Sens.

When the Coyotes got caught testing ahead of the combine, it was investigated in January, Bettman got testimony from implicated staff in Aug, and the punishment was doled out later that same month.

Absolutely. It's definitely upsetting it took so long, but it's not exactly surprising.

They never even started the investigation until 9/10 months ago when it got pushed up the pole by Vegas, it involved 3 separate teams, and apparently was still being looked well into the summer after the sale was announced.

It wasn't a "this team did this wrong, lets dish out the penalty", it was a "we need to figure out what went wrong, who and how were teams and players effected, was it malicious or just incompetence which likely took a ton of digging and arguing (as Bettman said with the Coyotes, because it wasn't malicious, there would be no suspensions of any individuals, it was gross negligence on our part), how do we take into account the sale and change of ownership.

The penalty isn't surprising to Andlauer, he knew it was coming down the pipeline. The severity was very upsetting and surprising. Could the NHL have ruled earlier? I would think so, but at the same time it seems they were still conducting meetings and interviews throughout the summer.

If we are banking on "we should have gotten the ruling earlier" to lessen the penalty, we are likely not going to be pleased

 

[Cosmix]

Dorion lied. Its been hinted at many times. They asked Dorion what happened and they later found out that they were misled or their findings didnt line up

the NHL is not taking a 1st from Andlauer unless they absolutely had to.

I would believe that if the NHL was transparent and informative in its media release of the facts.