• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Majsheppard

Why isn't the Wild in hot water for their owner's comments?

Rate this topic

47 posts in this topic

I have a question about the rules that I cannot lock down.

The Wild owner just let it leak out that he will not be outbid for Parise... while he was still under contract and the Devils have exclusive negotiating rights.

Holland said it himself during an NHL Live interview, that he can't name names before July 1st or it would be tampering.

Now we know the Lions lost a draft pick recently when former KC coach Cunningham said he would like to get a player that was undercontract with the Chiefs. I can only assume the same system is in place for all of the sporting leagues.

Now, why hasn't there been any talk about hitting the Wild with a penalty over this?

If the Devils were trying to sign Parise for a hypothetical amount- such as 7 Million- and he was asking for 8 hypothetically, then it is possible by July first they negotiate to somewhere in the middle... such as 7.5. Saying this can allow the agent of Zach to say, he just said they won't be outbid. Not only are we going to get 8 there, we are going to get 9 million there, 8 was the hometown discount for you. We demand 8. Now the Devils are stuck paying 8 or letting Zach walk and get at least 8 from the Wild.

See how that should be cheating? The general feeling seems to be that since the source was a friend who had dinner with him... At least that is what George Malik thinks. I think that is a weak defense. Why doesn't Holland just go out with a Ashar Khan for dinner and give him a list of names and say this is off the record WINK. Then he could write a story and Holland could deny it and say I wouldn't do that because it would be cheating? You know why he doesn't do it, because he is classy.

I just want to know, what are the rules and what should happen? Also, why aren't we more upset about this. I think we should point this out, because it would piss us off if it happened to us. It also could inhibit our ability to get him if we choose to bid for his services.

The link to the source is below.

The Skinny.

hillbillywingsfan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because, per the source, it wasn't anyone from the Wild that actually made the comment public. The guy who made the comment is the former GM of the Minnesota North Stars and the comments were based on a conversation he supposedly had with the current owner & GM of the Wild. Minnesota North Stars...Minnesota Wild... See the difference? In fact, Lou Nanne has never been affiliated with the Wild at all. It wasn't Leipold, Fletcher, or anyone else in the Wild organ-i-zation that made public comments.

To give you an example, that would be the equivalent of former Maple Leaf's GM John Ferguson coming out & saying in an interview that he just played golf with Kenny Holland & they had a long chat on the back 9 about the Wings going after Ryan Suter. Does he now represent the Wings organ-i-zation by making that comment? No, it is considered hearsay unless it can be confirmed with Holland & that wouldn't happen. IF Kenny confirmed it, THEN that would be tampering.

Edited by ogreslayer
Nightfall, T-Ruff and centcougar07 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/story/2009/10/07/sp-hockey-leafs-fine.html

Summary of the article: the Leafs were fined for the public comments made by Ron Wilson. Craig Leipold's comments, on the other hand were (allegedly) made at dinner and then reported by whomever, not given publicly. In fact, there's absolutely no proof that Leipold said anything of the sort; right now, all we have is hearsay, which means nothing, from someone not affiliated with the team.

Personally, I think the rules concerning "tampering" are ridiculous anyways. Obviously negotiating with an impending free agent before the free agency period begins is a big no-no, but that would be outright cheating. But what the hell is the point of making GMs and coaches pretend that they aren't interested in acquiring an impending UFA if he goes to market? It's a pointless exercise. Everybody in hockey knows that there are 29 teams interested in Zach Parise, so who really cares if people talk about it? You can bet your bottom dollar that these conversations happen constantly behind closed doors and in private anyways. It's silly to put the blinders on.

As far as you example concerning Parise's price point: why should there be a rule in place which restricts the information available to everyone when negotiating salary? How is it fair to restrict information for the benefit of one team, possibly to the detriment of the 29 other teams AND the player(s) in question? I understand that he's still technically under contract with the Devils, but why is the team being protected instead of the players? The players are the talent, they're the ones out on the ice, and if they want to get paid more for it by going to free agency, that's their prerogative. Trying to withhold information that would influence that decision - a life-changing, multi-million dollar decision - is outrageous.

Edited by ComradeWasabi
T-Ruff and ogreslayer like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be upset if I thought the Wild had any chance whatsoever to sign him. Or any top free agents for that matter...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because, per the source, it wasn't anyone from the Wild that actually made the comment public. The guy who made the comment is the former GM of the Minnesota North Stars and the comments were based on a conversation he supposedly had with the current owner & GM of the Wild. Minnesota North Stars...Minnesota Wild... See the difference? In fact, Lou Nanne has never been affiliated with the Wild at all. It wasn't Leipold, Fletcher, or anyone else in the Wild organ-i-zation that made public comments.

To give you an example, that would be the equivalent of former Maple Leaf's GM John Ferguson coming out & saying in an interview that he just played golf with Kenny Holland & they had a long chat on the back 9 about the Wings going after Ryan Suter. Does he now represent the Wings organ-i-zation by making that comment? No, it is considered hearsay unless it can be confirmed with Holland & that wouldn't happen. IF Kenny confirmed it, THEN that would be tampering.

Good point.

Seeing as how he was having dinner with the Wild owner when the comments were allegedly made though, they obviously have a relationship. shady, but I guess not technically against the rules.

Maybe someone should have dinner with Mr. I and let slip the terms the Wings are preparing to offer Parise. ;)

esteef likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the idea of Wild offering Parise a blank check proves how careless they are over cap management, and teams that are poor at cap management never amount to anything. Parise wants to be on a competitive team and that starts at the top with management making smart (and swift) decisions for not only today, but for the future.

Wild will be a sinking ship if they offer blank checks to every good UFA available in July.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had dinner with Mr. I the other night and he said that no one was going to outbid the Wild....except the Red Wings...

...ya, me and Mr Istanbul are pretty good friends...I also heard that the Red Wings plummer said that they were going to sign him too. I am tired of all this hearsay, lets do something! Deal for his rights Minny if you want to get first crack at him, come on Leopold, call up your buddy centcougar and get a deal done, he can recommend a few prospects that you could deal, he knows all about them...

...right now, there are 29 (no Rangers) teams thinking they have a shot at Parise, so who the f*** cares who said what, let your actions to the talking. If he signs in Minny then great, his mistake, but at least it'll be over. Guarantee one thing come July 1st, there are 29 groups of fans that when he signs, one of those groups are going to say, "See, I told you he was coming here!" Let's hope it's Detroit, but if it isn't, whoopee-tee-doo!

Flashback to 2001, June 30th. Jeremy Roenick agrees to a huge deal with the Flyers, he later says that Detroit offered him the same exact deal and he chose Philly because he felt that they had a better shot and winning sooner and more...Detroit settled for Robitaille and Hull. He will tell you himself, looking back that was a huge mistake especially had he known Detroit was going to deal for Hasek. Hindsight is 20/20, but JR is without a Cup forever...

I say, lets just get it done, whoever wants him the most, make the deal today, trade for his rights. Hey Minny, show us what you got...

Z Winged Dangler likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the idea of Wild offering Parise a blank check proves how careless they are over cap management, and teams that are poor at cap management never amount to anything. Parise wants to be on a competitive team and that starts at the top with management making smart (and swift) decisions for not only today, but for the future.

Wild will be a sinking ship if they offer blank checks to every good UFA available in July.

The problem with the blank check is, salaries are going to skyocket because of it! There is no way Parise deserves more money that Crosby (as much as I hate him) and that is the bottom line...if Crosby gets $9M, Parise is around $7M for value, $8M should be tops, VERY VERY tops! I hope Holland doesn't offer Parise a blank check, there has to be a line drawn somewhere or next you'll see Hudler asking for $6M...and the Abby's of the world will be demanding and getting $5M...if it comes down to Leopold giving Parise a blank check to put $10M on, then you can have him Minny, then in 5 years (with no Cups still) you'll be screaming for a trade!

Holland, just say yes to Parise, but NO to a blank check...$8M TOPS...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be upset if I thought the Wild had any chance whatsoever to sign him. Or any top free agents for that matter...

I wouldn't dismiss them so easily, especially in Parise's case since he is from Minnesota. Aside from that they have one of the most modern and loud arenas, and the most consistently sold out arena in the US. If I'm a UFA Minnesota is always one of my top 5 destinations.

centcougar07 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't dismiss them so easily, especially in Parise's case since he is from Minnesota. Aside from that they have one of the most modern and loud arenas, and the most consistently sold out arena in the US. If I'm a UFA Minnesota is always one of my top 5 destinations.

Not if you want to win...but anything is possible...I guess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NHL By-law 15.1 C

The making or causing to be made, through any medium, public or private, any statement indicating any intention or desire of or interest in acquiring the services of any person referred to in (a) [players] or (b) [other contracted team employees, ie: coach, GM...] hereof, except when such statement is communicated to the Member Club entitled to such services in a confidential manner or is made during a period when such person remains on a Free Agent List in accordance with Section 9A.5, may, at the discretion of the Commissioner, be deemed to be a contravention of this By-Law.

If the comments reported were actually made by Leipold, then Bettman could decide it's tampering.

While we all know the needs and cap space of different teams, and can assume who they'll be interested in, saying you'll match/beat any offer goes a lot farther. Too far, IMO. Main problem is there isn't likely any way to prove he really said it, unless he was dumb enough to mention Parise's name on tape/email/etc.

Majsheppard likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XCEL Energy Center was not selling out these last 2 seasons. FACT. Take a guess why?

Because the on ice product is s***. People in this state in a way care more about high school hockey and college hockey than the Wild. That's only because the Wild are awful.

Edited by St. Michael (the Red Wing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Kenny just needs a media stooge to say everything out loud that he doesn't want to get in trouble for? How about one for Babcock to rip the officials after games too? As long as they're not on the payroll we're all good right?

esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let him sign a contract there, the NHL will deem it illegal and against the CBA and then nullify the contract...discipline the Wild. fine, suspend, take away draft picks, ban them from post season games, ban then from Nationally televised games, castrate the GM...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because, per the source, it wasn't anyone from the Wild that actually made the comment public. The guy who made the comment is the former GM of the Minnesota North Stars and the comments were based on a conversation he supposedly had with the current owner & GM of the Wild. Minnesota North Stars...Minnesota Wild... See the difference? In fact, Lou Nanne has never been affiliated with the Wild at all. It wasn't Leipold, Fletcher, or anyone else in the Wild organ-i-zation that made public comments.

To give you an example, that would be the equivalent of former Maple Leaf's GM John Ferguson coming out & saying in an interview that he just played golf with Kenny Holland & they had a long chat on the back 9 about the Wings going after Ryan Suter. Does he now represent the Wings organ-i-zation by making that comment? No, it is considered hearsay unless it can be confirmed with Holland & that wouldn't happen. IF Kenny confirmed it, THEN that would be tampering.

Does anyone ever read?

I clearly stated that it was second hand. It shouldn't matter, if the person is saying he told me this... then as long as that person is a credible source it is no different than issuing a press release. If I tell a newspaper reporter I intend to sign someone, he writes his story saying the source told him he was going to sign this person. That is the basis of journalism. IF a journalist lies about a source, they lose credibility so it is a bad idea to lie. Based on tampering, saying that to a journalist would be illegal. I am saying how is this any different?

If the owner tells a former general manager and a friend and he goes and blabs, he is getting the story out the same as if through a journalist. The only difference is he could lie and therefore the Owner has more deniability... The problem is either way the concept is out there, hence my hypothetical. If the line is one extra lie??? That doesn't make it something besides cheating, it just makes it cheating AND lying.

He is a former general manager, I take him at face value and I think the owner should have to prove he didn't say this and prove him a liar. Otherwise it is tampering. IF they aren't going after him, not only should we all be upset. But why don't we start just lying about this stuff with credible sources. Hasek should say that he had dinner with Holland and he said we were really interested in Suter, Parise, Wideman, and Doan and that if he could get those guys he knows we would win a championship. He could also say that if he could get all of them to take a bit less than we could also swing Moen. Just a hypothetical mind you, but that would send a signal to all of those players that maybe I should not resign yet, or use it as leverage to get more money. Hell, I would start saying we were going after RFA players and will pay them 8 million or something, and get them to go overboard. Why not have Hasek say that we will offer Oshie 7 million a season so he ups the bill on the Blues?

I just feel like he needs to explain this, especially when the Lions lost a pick for a nobody based upon comments that I have never heard the source of...

LeftWinger likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone ever read?

I clearly stated that it was second hand. It shouldn't matter, if the person is saying he told me this... then as long as that person is a credible source it is no different than issuing a press release. If I tell a newspaper reporter I intend to sign someone, he writes his story saying the source told him he was going to sign this person. That is the basis of journalism. IF a journalist lies about a source, they lose credibility so it is a bad idea to lie. Based on tampering, saying that to a journalist would be illegal. I am saying how is this any different?

If the owner tells a former general manager and a friend and he goes and blabs, he is getting the story out the same as if through a journalist. The only difference is he could lie and therefore the Owner has more deniability... The problem is either way the concept is out there, hence my hypothetical. If the line is one extra lie??? That doesn't make it something besides cheating, it just makes it cheating AND lying.

He is a former general manager, I take him at face value and I think the owner should have to prove he didn't say this and prove him a liar. Otherwise it is tampering. IF they aren't going after him, not only should we all be upset. But why don't we start just lying about this stuff with credible sources. Hasek should say that he had dinner with Holland and he said we were really interested in Suter, Parise, Wideman, and Doan and that if he could get those guys he knows we would win a championship. He could also say that if he could get all of them to take a bit less than we could also swing Moen. Just a hypothetical mind you, but that would send a signal to all of those players that maybe I should not resign yet, or use it as leverage to get more money. Hell, I would start saying we were going after RFA players and will pay them 8 million or something, and get them to go overboard. Why not have Hasek say that we will offer Oshie 7 million a season so he ups the bill on the Blues?

I just feel like he needs to explain this, especially when the Lions lost a pick for a nobody based upon comments that I have never heard the source of...

That would only happen if Holland's buddy said something like that...don't you know by now, the rules are only enforced strictly when it comes to Detroit...when it involves other teams, they just rescind penalties, allow the 6th man to get back off the ice after a minute or so...you know, when it doesn't make Detroit the better team, the Bettman Rules are invoked. If Detroit will benefit, then its strictly by the book...

hillbillywingsfan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't dismiss them so easily, especially in Parise's case since he is from Minnesota. Aside from that they have one of the most modern and loud arenas, and the most consistently sold out arena in the US. If I'm a UFA Minnesota is always one of my top 5 destinations.

So the crowd at the arena is what sells you as a UFA? Not a chance to win, great location (which admittedly Detroit is not necessarily), teammates, level of media intrusion in your life, etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question about the rules that I cannot lock down.

The Wild owner just let it leak out that he will not be outbid for Parise... while he was still under contract and the Devils have exclusive negotiating rights.

Holland said it himself during an NHL Live interview, that he can't name names before July 1st or it would be tampering.

Now we know the Lions lost a draft pick recently when former KC coach Cunningham said he would like to get a player that was undercontract with the Chiefs. I can only assume the same system is in place for all of the sporting leagues.

Now, why hasn't there been any talk about hitting the Wild with a penalty over this?

If the Devils were trying to sign Parise for a hypothetical amount- such as 7 Million- and he was asking for 8 hypothetically, then it is possible by July first they negotiate to somewhere in the middle... such as 7.5. Saying this can allow the agent of Zach to say, he just said they won't be outbid. Not only are we going to get 8 there, we are going to get 9 million there, 8 was the hometown discount for you. We demand 8. Now the Devils are stuck paying 8 or letting Zach walk and get at least 8 from the Wild.

See how that should be cheating? The general feeling seems to be that since the source was a friend who had dinner with him... At least that is what George Malik thinks. I think that is a weak defense. Why doesn't Holland just go out with a Ashar Khan for dinner and give him a list of names and say this is off the record WINK. Then he could write a story and Holland could deny it and say I wouldn't do that because it would be cheating? You know why he doesn't do it, because he is classy.

I just want to know, what are the rules and what should happen? Also, why aren't we more upset about this. I think we should point this out, because it would piss us off if it happened to us. It also could inhibit our ability to get him if we choose to bid for his services.

The link to the source is below.

The Skinny.

Doesn't anyone ever read? Where exactly in your original post do you "clearly state it was second hand"? In fact, in the bolded piece above, you stated that "The Wild owner just let it leak out". No, the entire story is about Lou Nanne, who has absolutely no affiliation with the Wild & is not a journalist, taking the story to the press. By saying "the owner leaked it" you either had to be there to hear the conversation or you're making a "wild" assumption. Unless the NHL has proof, i.e. they heard Leipold tell Nanne to go to the press with the info OR if Leipold himself had made those comments in public or to a member of the press, they're not going to do anything. There's absolutely no evidence that Leipold wanted that in the press, again just assumptions. Bottom line, the NHL isn't going to start handing out fines & taking draft picks away on assumptions. And btw the Nanne situation in no way, shape, or form would compare to Holland going out to dinner with an Ashar Khan, who is a journalist, and dropping information about the who's & how much's they're going after as UFAs. There is a much much greater expectation of conversations being private when had among friends when compared to being had with journalists either on or off the record.

All it is at this point is hearsay...

{heer-say}

Noun

1. unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another & not part of one's direct knowledge

2. an item of idle or unverified information or gossip; rumor

Until it is verified, as in Leipold or Fletcher confirm the conversation went like that, it is 100% NOT tampering & nothing will ever come of it.

Edited by ogreslayer
hillbillywingsfan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not if you want to win...but anything is possible...I guess...

So the crowd at the arena is what sells you as a UFA? Not a chance to win, great location (which admittedly Detroit is not necessarily), teammates, level of media intrusion in your life, etc.?

Minnesota is a better location I would say, and the media intrusion is probably about the same. Detroit might have the edge in teammates but that could be me being biased as well.

As far as a chance to win, they're not far off from being regular playoff contenders IMO, especially if you add Parise to the mix.

That said I think Detroit still has the edge over Minnesota, I just found it really odd that they were being dismissed as a UFA destination so readily.

Edited by T-Ruff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NHL By-law 15.1 C

The making or causing to be made, through any medium, public or private, any statement indicating any intention or desire of or interest in acquiring the services of any person referred to in (a) [players] or (b) [other contracted team employees, ie: coach, GM...] hereof, except when such statement is communicated to the Member Club entitled to such services in a confidential manner or is made during a period when such person remains on a Free Agent List in accordance with Section 9A.5, may, at the discretion of the Commissioner, be deemed to be a contravention of this By-Law.

If the comments reported were actually made by Leipold, then Bettman could decide it's tampering.

While we all know the needs and cap space of different teams, and can assume who they'll be interested in, saying you'll match/beat any offer goes a lot farther. Too far, IMO. Main problem is there isn't likely any way to prove he really said it, unless he was dumb enough to mention Parise's name on tape/email/etc.

Thank you for the quote. Through any medium. I would say that includes the one the owner said. The letter of the law.

YOU SIMPLY CANNOT DISCUSS NAMES TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF THE ORGANIZATION!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question about the rules that I cannot lock down.

The Wild owner just let it leak out that he will not be outbid for Parise... while he was still under contract and the Devils have exclusive negotiating rights.

Holland said it himself during an NHL Live interview, that he can't name names before July 1st or it would be tampering.

Now we know the Lions lost a draft pick recently when former KC coach Cunningham said he would like to get a player that was undercontract with the Chiefs. I can only assume the same system is in place for all of the sporting leagues.

Now, why hasn't there been any talk about hitting the Wild with a penalty over this?

If the Devils were trying to sign Parise for a hypothetical amount- such as 7 Million- and he was asking for 8 hypothetically, then it is possible by July first they negotiate to somewhere in the middle... such as 7.5. Saying this can allow the agent of Zach to say, he just said they won't be outbid. Not only are we going to get 8 there, we are going to get 9 million there, 8 was the hometown discount for you. We demand 8. Now the Devils are stuck paying 8 or letting Zach walk and get at least 8 from the Wild.

See how that should be cheating? The general feeling seems to be that since the source was a friend who had dinner with him... At least that is what George Malik thinks. I think that is a weak defense. Why doesn't Holland just go out with a Ashar Khan for dinner and give him a list of names and say this is off the record WINK. Then he could write a story and Holland could deny it and say I wouldn't do that because it would be cheating? You know why he doesn't do it, because he is classy.

I just want to know, what are the rules and what should happen? Also, why aren't we more upset about this. I think we should point this out, because it would piss us off if it happened to us. It also could inhibit our ability to get him if we choose to bid for his services.

The link to the source is below.

The Skinny.

Doesn't anyone ever read? Where exactly in your original post do you "clearly state it was second hand"? In fact, in the bolded piece above, you stated that "The Wild owner just let it leak out". No, the entire story is about Lou Nanne, who has absolutely no affiliation with the Wild & is not a journalist, taking the story to the press. By saying "the owner leaked it" you either had to be there to hear the conversation or you're making a "wild" assumption. Unless the NHL has proof, i.e. they heard Leipold tell Nanne to go to the press with the info OR if Leipold himself had made those comments in public or to a member of the press, they're not going to do anything. There's absolutely no evidence that Leipold wanted that in the press, again just assumptions. Bottom line, the NHL isn't going to start handing out fines & taking draft picks away on assumptions. And btw the Nanne situation in no way, shape, or form would compare to Holland going out to dinner with an Ashar Khan, who is a journalist, and dropping information about the who's & how much's they're going after as UFAs. There is a much much greater expectation of conversations being private when had among friends when compared to being had with journalists either on or off the record.

All it is at this point is hearsay...

{heer-say}

Noun

1. unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another & not part of one's direct knowledge

2. an item of idle or unverified information or gossip; rumor

Until it is verified, as in Leipold or Fletcher confirm the conversation went like that, it is 100% NOT tampering & nothing will ever come of it.

Fair enough, I didn't put it in the post... because it is in the link. Shame on me for that. I didn't rewrite the article in my post. HOWEVER... I DID suggest Holland do the same thing and used Hasek as proxy illustrating the SAME situation. I guess I figured you would read the source and then infer I read it as well having linked it and citing it as inspiration for my hypothetical. I guess that is asking a lot, and I should be more clear.

What isn't fair is the comparison with a journalist was made to illustrate what if a journalist made such hearsay. If someone tampers with a journalist they can deny it all the same, and the league would investigate. That is ALL I am asking for... both could deny it and there would be consequences for both.

Edited by Majsheppard
55fan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question about the rules that I cannot lock down.

The Wild owner just let it leak out that he will not be outbid for Parise... while he was still under contract and the Devils have exclusive negotiating rights.

Holland said it himself during an NHL Live interview, that he can't name names before July 1st or it would be tampering.

Now we know the Lions lost a draft pick recently when former KC coach Cunningham said he would like to get a player that was undercontract with the Chiefs. I can only assume the same system is in place for all of the sporting leagues.

Now, why hasn't there been any talk about hitting the Wild with a penalty over this?

If the Devils were trying to sign Parise for a hypothetical amount- such as 7 Million- and he was asking for 8 hypothetically, then it is possible by July first they negotiate to somewhere in the middle... such as 7.5. Saying this can allow the agent of Zach to say, he just said they won't be outbid. Not only are we going to get 8 there, we are going to get 9 million there, 8 was the hometown discount for you. We demand 8. Now the Devils are stuck paying 8 or letting Zach walk and get at least 8 from the Wild.

See how that should be cheating? The general feeling seems to be that since the source was a friend who had dinner with him... At least that is what George Malik thinks. I think that is a weak defense. Why doesn't Holland just go out with a Ashar Khan for dinner and give him a list of names and say this is off the record WINK. Then he could write a story and Holland could deny it and say I wouldn't do that because it would be cheating? You know why he doesn't do it, because he is classy.

I just want to know, what are the rules and what should happen? Also, why aren't we more upset about this. I think we should point this out, because it would piss us off if it happened to us. It also could inhibit our ability to get him if we choose to bid for his services.

The link to the source is below.

The Skinny.

Doesn't anyone ever read? Where exactly in your original post do you "clearly state it was second hand"? In fact, in the bolded piece above, you stated that "The Wild owner just let it leak out". No, the entire story is about Lou Nanne, who has absolutely no affiliation with the Wild & is not a journalist, taking the story to the press. By saying "the owner leaked it" you either had to be there to hear the conversation or you're making a "wild" assumption. Unless the NHL has proof, i.e. they heard Leipold tell Nanne to go to the press with the info OR if Leipold himself had made those comments in public or to a member of the press, they're not going to do anything. There's absolutely no evidence that Leipold wanted that in the press, again just assumptions. Bottom line, the NHL isn't going to start handing out fines & taking draft picks away on assumptions. And btw the Nanne situation in no way, shape, or form would compare to Holland going out to dinner with an Ashar Khan, who is a journalist, and dropping information about the who's & how much's they're going after as UFAs. There is a much much greater expectation of conversations being private when had among friends when compared to being had with journalists either on or off the record.

All it is at this point is hearsay...

{heer-say}

Noun

1. unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another & not part of one's direct knowledge

2. an item of idle or unverified information or gossip; rumor

Until it is verified, as in Leipold or Fletcher confirm the conversation went like that, it is 100% NOT tampering & nothing will ever come of it.

Fair enough, I didn't put it in the post... because it is in the link. Shame on me for that. I didn't rewrite the article in my post. HOWEVER... I DID suggest Holland do the same thing and used Hasek as proxy illustrating the SAME situation. I guess I figured you would read the source and then infer I read it as well having linked it and citing it as inspiration for my hypothetical. I guess that is asking a lot, and I should be more clear.

I don't care if it is hearsay, it has the same effect.

The rules say any means, public or private, any medium.

Is there anyone who is a lawyer? Let's just subpoena both of them and demand they say under oath if they had dinner together. Then if they lie we can have a perjury trial that lasts a decade. You know, like baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, he said it on radio and is a credible source, an investigation has to happen.

No, no it doesn't. Simply put, there was no public comment made by any member, past or present, of the Minnesota Wild organization in regards to going after Parise in free agency. That really is the only way that the league will automatically go after the team for tampering.

Sure, the Devils could file tampering charges & try to convince the Commissioners office to investigate. Realistically, the only way that happens is that Parise ends up signing with the Wild straight out of the gate on July 1st. And if all the league can find is that a 72 year old former GM of a completely different club, popped off at the mouth during a radio interview, nothing will come of it. Unless they can find hard evidence that there was a distinct plan to leak info out to the public (say like in an internal email chain) through Nanne or, like in the case of the Blues tampering w/ Scott Stevens when he was an RFA years ago, the actual existence of a contract that was drawn up & discussed with Parise's agent prior to July 1st, the whole thing will go nowhere.

windmill-tilting.jpg

centcougar07, FlashyG and number9 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0