Wing Nut 19 0 Report post Posted August 8, 2007 Are aribtrators really impartial or is there an agenda? I have always wondered if these guys were in league with league..... if you know what I mean. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted August 8, 2007 (edited) To me, it seems as though arbitrators are all over the board. I remember last year some of the ridiculously high amounts that were awarded, and now we hear about what most consider a "low-ball" award to Cammalleri. IMO, it just depends on who the arbitrator is and who the player is. As I already mentioned, its pretty much all over the board. Edited August 8, 2007 by Never Forget Mac #25 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted August 8, 2007 At some of these hearings the GMs really rip a player to shreds...Several years ago then Isles GM Milbury tore into poor Swede netminder Tommy Salo - the guy broke down into tears in front of everyone @ the hearing...Gotta wonder if the GMs who show up "brow-beat"/intimidate the arbitrators into awarding a lower amount Most of them do. Its the teams chance to essentially get the player for a bargain. No GM likes doing it, but they all do if need be in order to keep costs down. It's even more important now with the cap. The Salo incident is one of many where the player has left the hearing feeling like sh*t and that they're worthless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
irishtemper14+25 11 Report post Posted August 8, 2007 yea i really dont like arbitrations cuz it just seems the player gets shafted 4 times out of 5....like avery got awarded half of what he could get in fa Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
