Oilers possibly owe Bruins compensation for Chiarelli hire.

[Axeman33]

I missed this story earlier this week (and I guess others did too as there was no talk about it around here) but apparently the Oilers may owe the Bruins a compensatory pick for hiring Peter Chiarelli, even though the Bruins fired their former GM.

https://twitter.com/DarrenDreger/sta...79909399089152

As of Tues, Oilers and Bruins still discussing draft pick compensation for the hiring of Peter Chiarelli. Told it might take awhile

More details as to the "why" here in this article.

http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...ter-chiarelli/

[Loch]

I've always wondered how McDavid would look in a Bruins uniform...

(I know it ain't likely, but come on, most epic oilers fail ever)

[gainerama]

Yup, would love the compensation to be their 1st rd pick this year.

[Axeman33]

Apparently the compensation doesn't have to be from this years draft.

What kind of compensation could Boston be entitled to? LeBrun’s initial write-up on the new rule specified a second-round pick for in-season moves and a third-round pick for off-season hires. The rules are a little different for coaches and general managers; Chiarelli is considered an in-season hire for the purposes of the NHL’s new rules because he got a new job prior to the 2015 NHL Draft.

[LawMan]

Yeah this has been talked about off-and-on in the Edmonton media during the lead up to and the eventual hiring of Chairelli. The rule is clear that where one team hires a fired senior management personnel (which includes a GM, not sure what other roles it may include) under contract with his former team the former team in entitled to compensation. The compensation is a 2nd rounder if in-season (up to the draft) and 3rd rounder if in the offseason (post-draft to opening day). Since Chiarelli was under contract with the Bruins when he was hired by the Oilers the Oilers owe compensation. I believe the Oilers get to pick which 2nd rounder they give over the next 3 seasons. It’s a pretty dumb rule in my mind, if you’re firing someone I think you should have to give up all right and claim to him but the teams all agreed to the rule so it is what it is.

Further, the article you linked points out that generally speaking the firing team will waive the right to any compensation in an attempt to get the fired employee hired elsewhere. Once hired elsewhere the fired employee is no longer entitled to get paid by the firing team. Also, I’ve heard a few experts state that in the past many teams have simply waived their right to compensation as a show of good faith and to keep from burning bridges.

In this case I think the Oilers were so excited to sign Chairelli before he could interview elsewhere or change his mind that they didn’t bother to negotiate Chairelli’s release because it may have held up the deal. Further, they may have thought the Bruins would waive their reight to compensation for whatever reason. Now that the Oilers have hired Chiarelli they have no leverage to use against the Bruins to get them to forego their compensation so I’m not sure what there is to negotiate. I suppose the only thing the Oilers can do is offer a 3rd rounder this year as compared to a 2nd rounder 2 years from now.

[gainerama]

They should be fine giving up the 3rd rd this season or 2nd rounder later. EDM prospects don't usually make much noise if they are drafted later than 1st overall lately.

[rataylor22]

They should be fine giving up the 3rd rd this season or 2nd rounder later. EDM prospects don't usually make much noise if they are drafted later than 1st overall lately.

Ayo

[ericdaoust]

Why not just give them Matt Fraser back and call it a day?

[MarmotKing]

This is interesting. I'm looking forward to see what the pick will end up to be.

You would think not having to pay millions to someone for 3 years would be compensation enough.

[Mr. Guru]

It’s a pretty dumb rule in my mind, if you’re firing someone I think you should have to give up all right and claim to him but the teams all agreed to the rule so it is what it is.

If you don't have to keep paying him then sure.

[JagrBomb]

this is hilarious. peter chiarelli is literally worth more than some hockey players in trade talks.

[Rylant]

Just a quick question, because I am not entirely sure how it works. If Chiarelli had a couple of years left on contract, and the Bruins decide to fire him, I am pretty sure that they still have to pay him, at least for a portion of the remaining contract. It's not like he works at Best Buy, and they catch him stealing, and terminate him "with cause". Can anybody confirm or deny this? I think that would make things a little more complicated.

Rylant

[pmorrow]

Just a quick question, because I am not entirely sure how it works. If Chiarelli had a couple of years left on contract, and the Bruins decide to fire him, I am pretty sure that they still have to pay him, at least for a portion of the remaining contract. It's not like he works at Best Buy, and they catch him stealing, and terminate him "with cause". Can anybody confirm or deny this? I think that would make things a little more complicated.

Rylant

I believe if you get hired elsewhere your previous contract goes away. Otherwise you continue to get paid. All coach firings are technically without cause aka they are just fired because the team didn't want them any more. I think their contracts are sort of guaranteed as opposed to "notice" pay upon termination and I don't think there is a way to buy them out. I don't really know the rules but I imagine if the coach did something ridiculous you might be able to terminate them outright with no further compensation coming their way.

[als_revenge]

I believe if you get hired elsewhere your previous contract goes away. Otherwise you continue to get paid. All coach firings are technically without cause aka they are just fired because the team didn't want them any more. I think their contracts are sort of guaranteed as opposed to "notice" pay upon termination and I don't think there is a way to buy them out. I don't really know the rules but I imagine if the coach did something ridiculous you might be able to terminate them outright with no further compensation coming their way.

I think this interpretation is correct, as per: http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...gms-executives

The article says that: (a) the Bruins were on the hook for PC's remaining contract before he was hired elsewhere; and (b) that, generally, it makes sense for a team to waive compensation to get the fired person "off their books."

[Axeman33]

I think it's kinda greasy to go after the Oilers for compensation after they fired him, but it's completely within the rules to do so.