UPL and Malenstyn file for arbitration

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

Where are you getting that from? Everything I've read says they can not use other player's salaries. Pretty sure the arbitrator looks at them, but the team and the player can't make comparative monetary arguments. 

How else are you going to make a salary argument if you don't use other player stats as comparisons when making a case for a particular salary range?  It's the way it is done in all sports when negotiating in an arbitration setting or when negotiating with management outside of an arbitration structure. 

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, Taro T said:

If they DON'T use salaries, how exactly do you EVER get to saying how much a particular skill is worth?  Would seriously like to know how else you get to a contract value.  How would THAT arbitration go?

They team and player's agent both use COMPARABLE players and compare their particular skills in an effort to determine how much the player is worth.

You don't look at other player salaries on your own team (or on other teams for that matter) when the player isn't a comparable to him.  Aka, you can't say well, Dahlin's the best D-man on the team and UPL is the best goalie on the team so he should get $11MM too.  You also don't get to say, well the team has $13MM in cap space so my guy should get $6MM to get the team in line with other teams around the league.  You don't get to look at a guy that signed a UFA contract to justify a certain $ amount for an RFA.  But you ABSOLUTELY look at comparables and what they get paid.  That's the whole point of going to arbitration.  

 

Btw, am getting that directly from the CBA. The CBA SPECIFICALLY lists that the following is admissible in an arbitration hearing:

"(G) The compensation of any Player(s) who is alleged to be comparable to the party Player, provided, however, that in 
applying this or any of the above subparagraphs, the Salary Arbitrator shall not consider a Player(s) to be comparable to the 
party Player unless a party to the salary arbitration has contended that the Player(s) is comparable; nor shall the Salary Arbitrator 
consider the compensation or performance of a Player(s) unless a party to the salary arbitration has contended that the Player(s) is 
comparable."

That seems suspiciously similar to other players' salaries, no? 😉 

What you say makes sense so that Sporting News article is wrong? idk, there's probably some subtle legal ways of phrasing they have to use. It gets ugly though, which is why most teams try to avoid it. 

[JohnC]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

What you say makes sense so that Sporting News article is wrong? idk, there's probably some subtle legal ways of phrasing they have to use. It gets ugly though, which is why most teams try to avoid it. 

You are right that the arbitration proceeding in itself, regardless of the outcome, often leads to resentment on the part of the player. There's the human element of a player witnessing their organization arguing why you are not worth what you are asking for. It's easy to claim that it's simply part of the business, but what you feel is what you feel. Some players understand that this process is part of the business, while others who are more sensitive take it personally. 

 

[Taro T]

10 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

What you say makes sense so that Sporting News article is wrong? idk, there's probably some subtle legal ways of phrasing they have to use. It gets ugly though, which is why most teams try to avoid it. 

The clause in the CBA that says comparable players' contracts are used to help determine what the player's salary will be was in the post you quoted.  Whether you choose to believe it or not is your choice.