Monday, July 30, 2007

Arbitration and Avery ...

It seems like a bad combination given Sean Avery's reaction to the Rangers' brief that describes him as a 'detriment' to his team:
"It's hard not to take something like that personally and not to be emotional about it," Avery told The Post yesterday. "I know this is part of the business, I know this is part of the process, but it's extremely disappointing to read something like that coming from Slats [GM Glen Sather] and not to be offended by it.

"They talk about me taking, 'unnecessary penalties,' and make a lot of references about me that I don't want to go into but that I don't think are fair. I certainly don't think I was a detriment to the team."
And we haven't even gotten to the hearing yet.

29 Comments:

At 3:52 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How come Pierre McGUire said Avery was a real reason for the Rangers hitting their stride and making the playoffs, yet management thinks he's a "glorified grocery store employee" that should be "bagging people's groceries" as Mr. Avery noted during the 2004-05 lockout on Fan590 in Toronto?

 
At 3:57 PM, July 30, 2007, Blogger Jes Gőlbez said...

Avery is a detriment to his team, even with his enhanced production with the Rangers. The Kings made a great move just to get rid of the guy, and Avery should be able to take it as much as he gives it.

What a baby!

 
At 3:59 PM, July 30, 2007, Blogger Jes Gőlbez said...

PS: McGuire is an idiot

 
At 4:06 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Matt said...

I like Pierre McGuire. I find he always has something constructive and thought provoking to contribute.

 
At 5:04 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous The Hockey Rabbi said...

As a Ranger fan, I can tell you first hand that Avery's presence energized the team. The Rangers absolutely need him. Period. On the other hand, the guy's got a heck of a lot to prove. 20 regular season games does not erase all of the damage done throughout the earlier portion of his career. Additionally, where was he in the Buffalo series?
I'm not worried about hurt feelings. A successful season would go a long way in erasing any bad memories created by the arbitration process. Avery is a big boy. He knows its business.

 
At 5:06 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Avery better get some tips on crying during arbitration from Salo! Love it when a trash talker can't take the heat.

 
At 5:19 PM, July 30, 2007, Blogger Joe said...

Avery is the kind of guy who can wear thin on a team over time, but isn't necessarily a detriment to his team. Not only that, but I think he's getting better and better. When he first started with the Wings, he was kept in check by the fact that he was playing on a team that was having trouble giving Hall of Famers ice time. If he screwed up and took stupid penalties, he paid for it by giving time to guys like Robitaille. In Detroit, he was never really a detriment to the team outside of some sometimes bad penalties, but more often than not, he was drawing penalties, or if he took one, he took a better player along with him for the ride. He knew his job on that team, and he did it.

I think part of the reason why it didn't work out in LA was that the team just plain wasn't very good. On those LA teams, if Avery took his skate off and cut an opposing players head off while calling him whatever racial epithet he could think of, what of it? Who was gonna take his ice time? What was anyone gonna do about it? There was nothing to keep him grounded, to keep a bit of a leash on him. I think he started to learn better of it near the end of his time in LA, but that might be a product of LA coming up with talented youngsters who COULD take his minutes, as opposed to some amount of growth on Avery's part. Likely, it was a combination of both.

Avery is good at his job, period. The only way he starts becoming a detriment to his team is if that team sucks and has no way to keep in grounded, letting him run the show his way. Stick him on a good team, with players more skilled than him, players who can take his minutes, and the kind of team that gets into important situations like playoff games and such, where taking that bad penalty is actually a big deal, and he's no longer a distraction or a detriment, he's an asset.

 
At 5:26 PM, July 30, 2007, Blogger James Mirtle said...

I think the arbitration argument that will be made by the Rangers is that Avery simply takes too many unnecessary penalties — hence the detriment label. It's probably true insofar as it makes a good argument from the New York side; I'd expect Avery and his agent to present just as one-sided an argument.

 
At 6:37 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Arbitration is 90% based on numbers. Judge who eventually decides on the award is in most cases non-hockey person so these character references are meaningless and quite frankly stupid.
Of course Avery could say that his numbers would have been much better without bad coaching.
On the other side I agree that Avery should take it all in with a huge grin.

 
At 7:44 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I agree that Avery should take it all in with a huge grin."

As usual, an idiotic comment from an embittered moron who knows nothing about hockey.

NOBODY, Avery included, should have to take unprovoked shots at their character. It is irrelevant that Avery has acted like a jackass in the past; for this Rangers team, he has been nothing but a shot of pure adrenaline, playing with heart and an edge, and was exactly what the team needed down the stretch. Anyone on this list of comments who thinks he deserves a cheap-shot is simply proving their own small-mindedness and lack of class and character. Let's have YOUR boss call you a detriment to the organization and see how magnificent you feel. Oh, take it with a grin, man up. If you expect any other treatment, you're a hypocrite as well as a total retard.

Avery is doing his job, and he does it very well. If he didn't act the way he does, he wouldn't be in the league. End of story. He deserves a fat raise, not insults. If you think otherwise, no worries. The analysts on TSN will tell you what to think.

 
At 8:01 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Most sports athletes live in a different reality than regular folk, where they can choose to be easily offended by techniques that are designed to save employers significant amounts of money. Avery is asking for a huge raise, the Rangers predictably went low, and they must justify their reasons for doing so. That is why Sather used overly harsh language to describe Avery.

Avery does deserve a raise. He was excellent for the Rangers last year after the trade from LA, and played hurt in the Sabres series--giving a solid effort despite poor production. But I am tired of the issue of "respect" being bandied about in sports--it's a simpleton's issue.

 
At 8:30 PM, July 30, 2007, Blogger Pleasure Motors said...

I think the arbitration argument that will be made by the Rangers is that Avery simply takes too many unnecessary penalties — hence the detriment label.

Fair argument, but going by Desjardins' numbers (which only factor in LA, unfortunately, but it probably got better, if it changed at all, with NYR), he also draws almost three more penalties per game than he takes.


Avery is a detriment to his team, even with his enhanced production with the Rangers.

He also plays fairly tough minutes with mediocre-to-bad linemates and keeps his head above water, and will probalby be good for 40-50 points next year. If you can keep his yap in check, which New York did, he's a pretty useful player.

Besides, calling him a "detriment" is essentially saying your team is better off without him than with him, and even allowing for a bit of gamesmanship on Sather's part, if you believe that, why bother qualifying him at all? I think Avery has every right to be a bit upset, and assume he'll be leaving New York as soon as he can. He'll probably find a taker fairly quick, too.

 
At 8:56 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Mike said...

"Anyone who thinks he deserves a cheap shot ... is simply proving their own small-mindedness and lack of class and character."
"If you expect any other treatment, you're a hypocrite as well as a total retard."


I was going to respond, but your arguments are so convincing and well thought out, that I am clearly out of my league.

Do you also tell people who disagree with American foreign policy to "like it or leave it?"

 
At 9:38 PM, July 30, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, naturally, this is all about Bush...

Like that other guy said, if Avery is such a detriment to the team, why not just trade him away for a bag of pucks? It makes no sense to embitter someone who you expect to play on your team.

James Vander Woude

 
At 9:42 PM, July 30, 2007, Blogger danae said...

Sean Avery and Dustin Penner have similar point totals. Good thing for the Rangers Penner only has an offer sheet right now and not a SPC at $4M+.

 
At 9:59 PM, July 30, 2007, Blogger Art Vandelay said...

If Avery is a detriment, then why did he dress for any games at all? Or did he become a detriment after NYR was eliminated from the playoffs?
Sather = douchebag.
True 23 years ago. True today.

 
At 1:09 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I agree that Avery should take it all in with a huge grin."

As usual, an idiotic comment from an embittered moron who knows nothing about hockey.

Well, in fact I have played both in the Olympics (for Finland) and NHL so I do know one or two things about hockey.

I was just trying to say that one way to react to stupidity is the way Miikka Kiprusoff reacted to Sutter's comments in his arb.

Don't react to it or try to undermine it but you're probably too stupid to get it.

1+1?

 
At 1:25 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, in fact I have played both in the Olympics (for Finland) and NHL so I do know one or two things about hockey.

Me too. i've got 28... hundred gold metals and five... hundred billion stanley cup rings.

 
At 1:25 AM, July 31, 2007, Blogger Nick said...

Wow james, you're attracting some real big shots to your blog

 
At 1:54 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I quess you missed the point but it's ok.
Point was not my games played but Avery's reaction since in arbitration Avery or his agent doesn't say a thing.
It's done between NHLPA's lawyer vs. Rangers' lawyer but you guys already knew it. Right?
And you still haven't answered to this 1+1 question. I understand, it's a tough one.

 
At 2:00 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Metals?

I couldn't find it in my Finnish-English-Finnish dictionary.

Petal to the metal?

28... hundred? In proper English it's 2,800... two thousand and then eight hundred. Not 28 hundred.

1+1?

 
At 2:01 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Mike said...

OK, let's turn this around and ask a different question. What ~should~ Sather say? Should he say nothing, and let the NHLPA rep portray Avery as the golden child and then just pay up?

The whole process is setup in such a way that the team's rep has to table as many negatives as possible to keep costs down.

It would not be effective to go in, talk nicely, and try to tactfully point out that the player is good, but not ~that~ good.

 
At 2:21 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Having seen it first hand I wouldn't say Sather and Co. shouldn't say anything negative, just try to show Avery's stats in the worst possible way.
But to be careful how to do it because after the award is given Avery still plays for you.
And it's stats based system. You can say all you want about penalty being "bad one" but at the same time teams are using lack of PIMs as sign of softness.
You can't really make a difference between good and bad penalty in arbitration.
It's pretty much established that penalty minute is a good thing.
As is icetime for defenceman. I can't quote exact comment by the judge right now but it's Jason Woolley decision when that was established.
1+1?

 
At 3:19 AM, July 31, 2007, Blogger Joe said...

I understand that Sather has to go in and explain why Avery is NOT worth as much money as he thinks, which means he has to portray Avery in a poor light. Avery understands that too, I think every player does. But you have to do it smartly. Running around calling people detrimental to a team and letting said comments get into the public like that is NOT good business practice. You go in and say "he takes bad penalties sometimes and he never shuts up", not "this guy sucks, hes a detriment to our team, and part of the Drury and Gomez deals was that they get to tag team his mom". As said before, the man is still gonna work for you after the ruling, you don't want to ruin that relationship.

It doesn't help that Sather has put himself up against the wall in terms of cap space either, so he doesn't want Avery to get a huge raise. He had to know he earned it and its coming. Letting your plans hinge on an arbitrator's ruling and hoping for the best isn't a good idea.

 
At 3:39 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fact that Sean Avery is an idiot has nothing to do with arbitration. Like my good friend, the Team Finland D-man above (I've played against him many times, even in the 1988 Olympics) says, it's 90% numbers.

Idiot is a noun.

1+1? Sean Avery's season-high for points in a game?

 
At 8:54 AM, July 31, 2007, Blogger jorach said...

I would like you all to know that I'm actually Wayne Gretzky.

I think Sean Avery is a detriment to the Rangers and thus the argument is over.

 
At 10:07 AM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Me too. i've got 28... hundred gold metals and five... hundred billion stanley cup rings.

Ed Belfour.....is that you?

 
At 12:12 PM, July 31, 2007, Blogger MetroGnome said...

this comment string has become quite entertaining...

 
At 12:19 PM, July 31, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, this is Ed Belfour and I approve of this post.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Links to this post:

Create a Link


.

Free Page Rank Checker
eXTReMe Tracker