Rangers seek compensation for Cherepanov
by James Mirtle on Nov 6, 2008 7:16 PM CST
32 comments
The Rangers are seeking a compensatory selection in the 2009 NHL Entry Draft for the loss of Alexei Cherepanov, The Post has learned.
Sather is submitting that the Rangers should receive the 17th selection in the second round of June's draft as compensation for losing Cherepanov, the 17th overall selection in the 2006 Draft who died in Russia on Oct. 13 while playing for Omsk.
Boy, you can see why this might be a sensitive subject.
I don't think you can fault the Rangers for exploring this option, but some of the language used by assistant GM Cam Hope is a bit unfortunate.
"We understand that this is a sensitive issue, but with all due respect to Alexei's family and his memory, he is technically eligible to be drafted again next year.
"We are not attempting to capitalize on a tragedy, but there would be no question regarding the Rangers' right to a compensatory pick if Cherepanov had been revived and survived the incident and were on life support."
Yikes. Yikes.
8.3 Compensatory Draft Selections.
(a) In addition to the seven (7) rounds of the Entry Draft, there shall be an additional number of Compensatory Draft Selections not to exceed the number of Clubs to be in the League in the following year.
(b) In the event a Club loses its draft rights to an Unsigned Draft Choice drafted in the first round of the Entry Draft (except as a result of failing to tender a required Bona Fide Offer (as defined below)), who is again eligible for the Entry Draft or becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent, a Compensatory Draft Selection shall automatically be granted to that Club, which Compensatory Draft Selection shall be the same numerical choice in the second round in the Entry Draft immediately following the date the Club loses such rights. By way of example, if a Club cannot sign the third pick in the first round, it will receive the third pick in the second round as compensation.
0 recs |
32 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Cold...
“he is technically eligible to be drafted again next year”
That just feels like such a cold – and lawyerish – statement.
Is a deceased person really “technically eligible” anyways? Shouldn’t death preclude eligibility?
by ShaneG on Nov 6, 2008 7:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well, you'd think so.
But then, you’re not Glen Sather, either…
by Doogie2K on Nov 8, 2008 4:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Technically he's not eligible to be drafted next year.
Since he’s DEAD.
by twoeightnine on Nov 6, 2008 7:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Wow
Absolutely fucking classless by the Rangers.
A Toronto sports blog, where we unequivocally and unapologetically support the home team...
by eyebleaf on Nov 6, 2008 8:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
This is really a sensitive subject. Actually, I agree with all of the comments that say this is classless.
The Penguins lost Michael Briere in 1971 to a car crash, but I guess the distinct difference here is that he played in the NHL, huh? What difference does it make in the end? Saying the Rangers can get compensation for Cherepanov is like saying any team had the rights to him when he was alive. Fact is, Cherepanov was a player in the Rangers system. Therefore the Rangers retain him, dead or alive. If not, then technically if the Rangers are eligible for a compensatory pick than the entire league should have had the option of signing Cherepanov when he was in Russia.
It doesn’t balance out in the end.
That’s my take.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com
by FrankD on Nov 6, 2008 8:30 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Words cannot describe
how ridiculously lame, classless, and stupid this is.
“With all due respect, we have no soul.”
SBN now has a NY Islanders blog at LighthouseHockey.com.
by Dominik on Nov 6, 2008 8:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. That’s what I’m saying. I already voiced my opinion on Mirtle’s post, but it is absolutely horrendous. A team drafts a player and retains his rights, dead or alive. That is it. The end.
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com
by FrankD on Nov 6, 2008 8:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Bourdon
Is the only difference between this case and Bourdon’s is the age? Since Cherepanov was still a “draftable” age?
by lordosis on Nov 6, 2008 8:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Bourdon had already signed a contract.
by James Mirtle on Nov 6, 2008 9:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Reading more of the guy's quotes now
He’s comparing Cherepanov to an injured player. An injured player can still be redrafted! A deceased person, by definition, cannot.
Says even if it’s not in “the letter” of the law, it’s clearly in “the spirit.” That’s a reach. What spirit are they conjuring exactly? Because I don’t see it. I figured the clause was to address when a team cannot sign a player because the player wants a better offer or to take his chances with another team (or league) — not to address “acts of God.” Maybe the GMs see it differently, though. They’re a funny bunch.
SBN now has a NY Islanders blog at LighthouseHockey.com.
by Dominik on Nov 6, 2008 8:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I wonder, will this potentially change a team’s approach to taking out insurance policies on their players? Can they do that?
Follow the Penguins on SBN @ Pensburgh.com
by FrankD on Nov 6, 2008 8:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think in the event they wanted to pursue this, which I don’t really agree with, they should have waited longer. Perhaps if the money were going to a memorial fund or some greater benefit than recouping expenses.
Ain't nothing but puck drops and poke checks, babydoll.
by wrap around curl on Nov 6, 2008 9:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
They’re not looking for financial compensation here, just a second-round pick in place of the lost first rounder.
by James Mirtle on Nov 6, 2008 9:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But...
he’s lost because he died, not because he ran off to the KHL or refused to sign and had to go back into the draft. I don’t see how they can use the rules to ask for this. Or how they have the cojones to do so.
It sucks for the Rangers that their pick died, but it sucks more for his family and friends.
And yes wrap, you’re right. If they were doing something to memorialize him, it would seem less awful. Not much less awful, but a little less.
by Mabel on Nov 7, 2008 2:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't believe this
Stay classy, Rangers.
by John Richardson on Nov 7, 2008 12:45 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
The funeral wasn't even a month ago.
Unbelievable. I understand hockey is a business, but this is just sickening.
I get the timing – it falls during the GM meetings – but seriously?
Let. It. Go.
by agreatdayforhockey on Nov 7, 2008 12:58 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Wow
"With all due respect, we have no soul."
Just about sums this whole situation up.
Fear The Fin: Where the second round is overrated.
by Mr. Plank on Nov 7, 2008 1:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, the timing sucks and the wording sucks, but I’m still surprised by the reactions in the comments and poll so far.
The whole point of the compensatory draft pick is to remove some of the risk involved with selecting players in the first round, specifically to encourage teams to feel more confident drafting players based on skill, rather than likelihood of making the NHL. The biggest of those risks is that overseas players will choose not to come to North America, but health risks are certainly covered, too.
They certainly aren’t going about it the right way, but it seems fairly clear-cut to me that they should get the compensatory pick.
by RyanV on Nov 7, 2008 2:03 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Actually, my impression is that the intent is to compensate teams who are unable to sign their first round picks to contracts. I don’t have numbers to back this up, but I believe that in the vast majority of cases (and there aren’t that many) it’s the player’s refusal to sign and not the team’s decision to give up on him that triggers compensation. They have to have offered him a contract (a “Bona Fide Offer”) for this to trigger, after all.
Assuming the Rangers did offer him a contract, they deserve a pick. If they did not – or if he had signed the contract prior to his death – they would not.
Denying them a pick requires assuming that a surviving Cherepanov would have agreed to a contract before June. When he was originally drafted there was considerable doubt that he would ever agree to play in the NHL, so I don’t think this is a fair assumption.
I've been looking at the sky
by Back In Black on Nov 7, 2008 9:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Teams are certainly compensated for players they choose not to sign (The Oilers pick of Ninnimaki comes to mind). I’d think that given that the Rangers will end up not signing Cherepanov, that they should be entitled to the compensatory pick. However, I’m not exactly an expert on the subject, so I could certainly be wrong.
That being said, what a terrible and insensitive way to go about this. They could have waited a little longer. Is this really something that needed to be brought up less than a month later?
Still, I don’t think they should be denied the pick based on being a bunch of classless dicks. If they’re supposed to get it based on the CBA they should, and if not they shouldn’t. Being an asshole isn’t a CBA issue.
by MattM on Nov 7, 2008 2:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The less said, the better. They should have just said they were seeking a compensatory draft pick and stopped there, instead of trying to justify it further. They just sound more and more heartless, because there is no good and sensitive way of saying “we want a replacement draft pick for our dead one.”
"A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with." -- Tennessee Williams
by Baroque on Nov 7, 2008 6:13 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
If the Rangers have reason for claim — and I’m by no means saying they do — the way to go about it is to put the claim through league channels and shut up. Then when that claim is leaked to Brooks and he comes after you with questions, you say “it’s with the league,” or “This is a unique case, and we’re simply looking into clarification of the letter and intent of the CBA.” You don’t go on a freaking crusade, crying harm, and prefacing your comments with, “With all due respect to [the deceased]” — which is basically a way of acknowledging that, “What I’m about to say will be really disrespectful to the deceased.”
Regarding the “spirit” of the law, I still don’t see why this provision would be intended to protect against injured or deceased draft picks. It seems the risk — and the reason for incenting teams to draft by talent rather than by signability — is the possibility that they won’t be signed or might jump to another league, not that they might get hurt or die (which is a risk that applies equally to every player regardless of talent or draft round). If the intent were to also protect from injury/death, then why does the possibility for compensation go away as soon as the player signs a contract? (i.e. Why isn’t there compensation for a signed pick who subsequently dies or suffers catastrophic injury?).
Then again, there is much in the CBA whose purpose baffles the common fan such as myself.
SBN now has a NY Islanders blog at LighthouseHockey.com.
by Dominik on Nov 7, 2008 1:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Even ignoring the timing and wording, this doesn't work
It specifically states that the player must become eligible for the Entry Draft next year, or become and unrestricted free agent. He clearly can’t become a UFA. Obviously the Rangers are hanging this argument on the fact that they believe Cherepanov will become draft eligible again.
The CBA states, for draft eligibility (Section 8.4):
8.4 Eligibility for Claim.
(a) All Players age 18 or older are eiigible for claim in the Entry Draft, except:
…
It goes on to mention exceptions to that rule, but note: this doesn’t work simply because you have to be a hockey player in order to be eligible, first and foremost. According to the CBA glossary of terms (Article 1: Definitions):
“Player(s)” means a hockey player who is party to an SPC, a Rookie, Unsigned Draft Choices, and Free Agents.
He is now no longer any of those, because he is deceased. So not only is this completely classless, it’s also not legal according to the CBA.
by jameshstephenson on Nov 7, 2008 7:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
and the Rangers continue to be a classy organization. What was said is completely disrespectful…
by DarrenS on Nov 7, 2008 10:41 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
So I guess I shouldn’t pick him up fro my keeper league then……
Leafs selling hope to the hopeless since 1967
by Toe Blake Hockey on Nov 7, 2008 11:33 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Where does it end??
what about Tampa bay, who drafted David Carle in this year’s draft. Carle was diagnosed with a condition in which great exertion could lead to a heart attack. he can’t play hockey..never. Tampa bay did this just to honnored the guy.
by Montreal JF on Nov 7, 2008 11:46 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Or Luca Cereda for the Leafs who was discovered to have a hole in his heart (IIRC)…cold cold cold.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
by PPP on Nov 7, 2008 2:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
As a rangers season ticket holder, this is both embarrassing, and not surprising, coming from a Glen Sather-led organization.
by poploser on Nov 7, 2008 11:48 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Couldn’t this have at least waited until after the season is over?
On top of that, I would have to agree with James Stephenson, it seems unlikely that Cherepanov could actually be considered draft eligible since he has, you know, died.
I award the Rangers no points (for class or draft compensation) and may God have mercy on their souls.
(Unless Sather says “a simple NO would have been fine”, in which case they get a chance at Tavares/Hedman)
by Hooks Orpik on Nov 7, 2008 3:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
How about another team DOES draft him next year, out of respect to the family, and then has a ceremony for him. I think that if this is the way it all ends, with the Rangers acting like they never even knew the guy, then it is a sad day for the NHL and it shows just how cold business can be, screwing up priorities.
Brett Gee
by Brett Gee on Nov 7, 2008 7:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Friday's WHL Roundup
- Shinnimin has four points as Americans hammer Giants 8-2 to keep West lead
- Eakin scores 20th goal of season in Swift Current's 4-1 win over Cougars
- Gal scores winner to lift Spokane over Thunderbirds 3-1
- Murray's short-handed goal leads Heat to fourth straight win, 4-2 over Ice Hogs
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
