Vegas / Anaheim voided Dadonov trade (upd: Ottawa forfeits 1st 24-26)

[Yukon Joe]

Wouldn't that disclosure duty belong to Melnyk's estate rather than the NHL?

Primarily. But NHL is almost certainly a signatory to the PSA as well since they have to approve the sale.

There's a distinction in contract law between a patent defect and a latent defect. A patent defect is one that is obvious, or at least that could have been discovered with reasonable due diligence. A latent defect is one the seller knows about, but could not be discovered using reasonable due diligence.

If you're in the process of selling your house. You previously had a fire caused by bad wiring. You patch up the house good as new - but you never fix the bad wiring. That would be a latent defect. If the house subsequently catches fire again the new owner can potentially sue for not disclosing the bad wiring.

Now of course this is all just based on basic principles, and you'd need to review the PSA and other documentation carefully before forming an informed legal opinion.

 

[TheLegend]

Ottawa loses 1st round pick in 2024, 2025 or 2026. Ottawa must choose one within 24 hours the conclusion of the 2024 Draft Lottery.

Senators forfeit draft pick over invalidated trade

The Senators must forfeit a first-round pick for the role they played in an invalidated trade involving Evgenii Dadonov.

www.espn.com

 

[StreetHawk]

Primarily. But NHL is almost certainly a signatory to the PSA as well since they have to approve the sale.

There's a distinction in contract law between a patent defect and a latent defect. A patent defect is one that is obvious, or at least that could have been discovered with reasonable due diligence. A latent defect is one the seller knows about, but could not be discovered using reasonable due diligence.

If you're in the process of selling your house. You previously had a fire caused by bad wiring. You patch up the house good as new - but you never fix the bad wiring. That would be a latent defect. If the house subsequently catches fire again the new owner can potentially sue for not disclosing the bad wiring.

Now of course this is all just based on basic principles, and you'd need to review the PSA and other documentation carefully before forming an informed legal opinion.

Kind of a lot to unpack.
1) was the Dandanov case closed or still open when the sale was under way?
2) lawyers for these kind of acquisitions would certainly put forth documents to the seller asking for anything outstanding against the team. That would then require the Melnyk estate to disclose if the case was not closed.

Is there a case to be made vs the nhl or only to the Melnyk estate? Does the nhl have to review the terms of the sale and if they see that there the Sens noted nothing outstanding against the team that the onus was on the nhl to inform the buyer that the Dandanov case is in fact still open?

I expected the nhl to be better run in the sense that all contracts are stored in the nhl central registry. On the odd chance an amendment is needed on a contract, such as back in 2016 when Subban was traded before his ntc kicked in for the final 6 years of his contract, then his ntc would have to be amended and removed from his SPC. Didn’t the nhl also allow players in the final year of their contract if they were into their ufa years to have any trade protection in their extension retroactively applied to the final year of their current deal? I think Doughty got a ntc added to the final year of his second contract. That would require an amendment as well.

So if Ottawa was thinking that dada ice ntc was voided that should have required paperwork with all of the backup sent it the nhl registry to review and then they would update/amend the contract if the ntc was voided or if it was not voidable then the contract would remain as is.

Seems odd that there is a reliance on another team for the contract details when it should be the nhl registry that has the defacto terms of the contract on file.

 

[LadyStanley]

Owner upset this took so long to resolve. Thinks that Vegas and Anaheim wanted penalty. But does admit the culpability of the Senators.

 

[LadyStanley]

 

[StreetHawk]

I get being angry. Evidence should have been fairly easy to obtain between the agent and the Sens to confirm whether the NTC list was submitted on time. Formal documents, either Email with so you have the electronic time stamp or sent via courier (like serving papers to someone), where evidence of delivery/receipt is recorded. Should not have taken this long to conclude the evidence.

*Edit*
Feels like the NHL probably held off making a decision until the Sens got sold. Again, information on the communication between the agent and Sens to confirm the delivery of that NTC list, should not have been hard to obtain. Maybe that is grounds for a lawsuit vs the NHL. Finding out when they got this information and them sitting on this info to make a decision until after the sale to hand down punishment.

This should be part of the due diligence process.

Probably has grounds to sue the Melnyk estate if this was not listed as a possible item against the team. Not sure, what his chances are of suing the NHL since they had to review the docs of the sale.

I'm all for him suing the NHL.

For a league with well over 100 ntc clauses, you should have the NHL central registry be the gatekeeper of any amendments to the NTC, such as a player losing it. Kind of a big deal. And it rarely happens, so not like they would be overburden, unlike the NFL where you have constant restructures of contracts to keep track of to ensure teams are cap compliant.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Owner upset this took so long to resolve. Thinks that Vegas and Anaheim wanted penalty. But does admit the culpability of the Senators.

Interesting line in the 32 thoughts article:

A few executives indicated such a punitive punishment comes when the NHL feels it is “misled” during investigations. “That’s a big no-no,” one exec said.

Suggesting that the Senators organization wasn't being completely honest during the league investigation.

 

[sabresfan65]

The players have fought tooth and nail to not have NTC lists in a central registry. They don't want more eyes having access to the lists. The more people that have access, the more people could leak the lists and players don't want to have to answer questions on why they don't want to be traded to "insert your favorite team here".

 

[Tawnos]

The players have fought tooth and nail to not have NTC lists in a central registry. They don't want more eyes having access to the lists. The more people that have access, the more people could leak the lists and players don't want to have to answer questions on why they don't want to be traded to "insert your favorite team here".

Do you have a source for that or are you speculating? If it were something that's been reported on, that'd be really interesting.

 

[Golden_Jet]

The players have fought tooth and nail to not have NTC lists in a central registry. They don't want more eyes having access to the lists. The more people that have access, the more people could leak the lists and players don't want to have to answer questions on why they don't want to be traded to "insert your favorite team here".

Too bad for the players, if they want a NTC, it might get leaked.

Interesting line in the 32 thoughts article:



Suggesting that the Senators organization wasn't being completely honest during the league investigation.

That doesn’t excuse the league, for something that should take a week tops to get the proper info, not 2 years.

 

[StreetHawk]

The players have fought tooth and nail to not have NTC lists in a central registry. They don't want more eyes having access to the lists. The more people that have access, the more people could leak the lists and players don't want to have to answer questions on why they don't want to be traded to "insert your favorite team here".

Don’t need the team lists stored on the registry. But the registry should be the source to confirm whether a ntc exists and the details of it. How many teams are on the ntc list?

Nhl contracts can’t be modified once signed. Only modifications in the cap world were when a guy got dealt prior to their trade protection starting thus the acquiring team could opt to not go or it like in the PK Subban trade from Mon to Nash. This has now been closed and all trade protection is Honoured once signed.

If trade protection exists for the player, would have expected the registry to be the definitive resource to rely on. If Ottawa believes the deadline was missed thus voiding the trade protection then they should have had to forward that information and documents to the registry to update the contract on file. If they didn’t then the trade protection should remain as it was.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Don’t need the team lists stored on the registry. But the registry should be the source to confirm whether a ntc exists and the details of it. How many teams are on the ntc list?

Nhl contracts can’t be modified once signed. Only modifications in the cap world were when a guy got dealt prior to their trade protection starting thus the acquiring team could opt to not go or it like in the PK Subban trade from Mon to Nash. This has now been closed and all trade protection is Honoured once signed.

If trade protection exists for the player, would have expected the registry to be the definitive resource to rely on. If Ottawa believes the deadline was missed thus voiding the trade protection then they should have had to forward that information and documents to the registry to update the contract on file. If they didn’t then the trade protection should remain as it was.

The issue here is that no trade lists have to be re-submitted each year by a certain date. Ottawa represented that no such list had been submitted, therefore Dadonov had no valid "no trade" list.

It turns out Ottawa was in error - Dadonov's agent had in fact submitted a list in a timely fashion.

The thing is - it's impossible to prove a negative. Ottawa can't prove that Dadonov DIDN'T file a list - they can only say they didn't receive a list.

 

[StreetHawk]

The issue here is that no trade lists have to be re-submitted each year by a certain date. Ottawa represented that no such list had been submitted, therefore Dadonov had no valid "no trade" list.

It turns out Ottawa was in error - Dadonov's agent had in fact submitted a list in a timely fashion.

The thing is - it's impossible to prove a negative. Ottawa can't prove that Dadonov DIDN'T file a list - they can only say they didn't receive a list.

It does seem weird that the onus falls to the agent to disprove the Sens claims.

All the Sens would have is their communication to the agent/player and the time stamp.

Whatever the deadline is that the player has to reply to that communication, that would then require the agent/player to provide their communication back to the Sens, to show that they did in fact send that information to the Sens before the time deadline.

But, it also should not have taken this long to verify that correspondence from agent/player to the Sens. You are not sending this via regular mail.

 

[Golden_Jet]

It does seem weird that the onus falls to the agent to disprove the Sens claims.

All the Sens would have is their communication to the agent/player and the time stamp.

Whatever the deadline is that the player has to reply to that communication, that would then require the agent/player to provide their communication back to the Sens, to show that they did in fact send that information to the Sens before the time deadline.

But, it also should not have taken this long to verify that correspondence from agent/player to the Sens. You are not sending this via regular mail.

Ya it’s weird it took 2 years to verify something that should have taken a week tops, even that seems long.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

That's potentially a quite serious allegation if Andlauer wants to pursue it. It's all going to depend on the language of the Purchase and Sale Agreement, but generally there's a duty to disclose anything that would materially affect the sale price.

That being said in a billion dollar acquisition one first round draft pick and one player suspended 41 games might not really move the needle, and as the new guy on the scene Andlauer might not want to rock the boat.

When it comes to Pinto he wasn't even under contract with Ottawa, they only maintained right of first refusal, so I'd imagine there was no obligation to disclose.

 

[LadyStanley]

The issue here is that no trade lists have to be re-submitted each year by a certain date.

Sometimes.

It depends on the wording.

Can be an one-time submittal, can be annually, can be on request.

Deadline might be 7/1 or 12/31 or another date.

It is not consistent.

 

[Major4Boarding]

Wouldn't that disclosure duty belong to Melnyk's estate rather than the NHL?

I’m just throwing this out there to get it out of my head. You would think, even being a minority owner with the Habs, he would’ve been aware of this situation. Maybe not to the extent of the full details of the investigation but I hope he’s not acting like he was blindsided by this either.

I mean, you have to think he knew something about how this went down through owner, management, and/or League circles no?

 

[TheLegend]

I’m just throwing this out there to get it out of my head. You would think, even being a minority owner with the Habs, he would’ve been aware of this situation. Maybe not to the extent of the full details of the investigation but I hope he’s not acting like he was blindsided by this either.

I mean, you have to think he knew something about how this went down through owner, management, and/or League circles no?

That’s been my thought. You’re dropping a billion on a franchise to call your own, you would think enough to do your own diligence into everything surrounding that franchise. Especially when you’re already a junior member of the club.

Just for giggles here’s their picks for the next three years…

Sitting on two first round picks in 2024 it’s not like this is going to hurt them.

 

[mouser]

I’m just throwing this out there to get it out of my head. You would think, even being a minority owner with the Habs, he would’ve been aware of this situation. Maybe not to the extent of the full details of the investigation but I hope he’s not acting like he was blindsided by this either.

I mean, you have to think he knew something about how this went down through owner, management, and/or League circles no?

I’m not going to attempt to quote him verbatim, but Andlauer appears to have acknowledged in his press conference that the NHL investigation was disclosed to him by Ottawa during the purchase process. Along with it was represented to him by Ottawa that the investigation wasn’t a big deal.

I’m sympathetic to Andlauer being upset he may not have been fully informed of the risk of a penalty, including the loss of a 1st round pick.

At the same time, I can understand if the Melnyk estate viewed the investigation as a small or non-material issue. The going rate for a 1st round pick these days is around $5m in real cash. That’s roughly 0.5% of the Senators $950m sale valuation.

Even if Andlauer was fully informed of the risk of losing a 1st round pick would that stop him from buying the team? Or materially change the sales price? Maybe drop the price from $950m to $945m? I’m confident the bankers and other professionals employed by Andlauer to negotiate the deal wouldn’t view the risk of losing a 1st round pick of your choice from 2024-26 as having a material impact on the team valuation.

 

[LadyStanley]

Discussing Andlauer's reaction