That's not how I read it at all
by Quisp on Aug 10, 2011 9:40 PM PDT
in Doughty Contract
Email
PrintHaving just posted my thoughts on tonight's Rich Hammond post, I find that I wasn't the only one. Here's Surly and Scribe:
On July 28, we told you the following about Drew Doughty’s contract status:
Just heard from our source minutes ago. Are you excited? I am excited. The L.A. Kings and Drew Doughty may have an agreement in principle on a long-term deal that may no longer have a NMC provision as a stumbling block. I am told there is also a "back up" 5 year deal in place. Everyone chatted via conference call and it ended well with a happy Drew. The devil is always in the details so this is not done and I expect both sides will continue to feed the media the work in progress lines, as quite bluntly they should, until the contract is signed. It could take a while still to finish it. Let’s hope that’s only days (and not weeks) away.
Counting today, July 28 was 14 days ago…or 2 weeks ago. From Rich Hammond today:
There have been no new discussions in the past two weeks. The Kings have a long-term offer on the table, but it wouldn’t be a surprise to see the issue extend into late August, or perhaps even into September. It’s worth noting that Doughty’s agent, Don Meehan, also represented Evgeni Nabokov(notes) when, in 2002, Nabokov held out before signing a contract with the San Jose Sharks (and then-GM Lombardi) in late October. As for the current Doughty negotiations, Lombardi said today, "I think it’s fair to say that in the last conversation, we set the parameters, as to where we feel his contract should be. We talked about a number of scenarios, and I guess now it’s their move. They never really responded."
So, their last discussion was 2 weeks ago…check. It was about a long-term deal…another check.
That's not news.
According to Lombardi, "we" (referring to Dean Lombardi and Doughty’s agents) set the "parameters" 2 weeks ago as to where both sides feel his contract should be
Lombardi does not say that "we" refers to Meehan, and he does not say that "both sides" agreed to the parameters. If you look back at Lombardi's past comments, "we" usually means Lombardi and other people who work for Lombardi. "The Kings organization."
and they talked about a number of scenarios (all within said parameters no doubt) in this phone conference…parameters…in other words, there was an agreement in principle as to where the contract numbers should fall [...] That sounds awfully familiar, doesn’t it? Where have we heard that before? Nah, we are just real good guessers.
This is in reference to a post a couple of weeks ago in which Surly and Scribe responded to criticism from another blogger -- not me, and I don't know who it was -- that their Doughty source was -- okay, I don't know what the other blogger said, but I assume it wasn't a compliment.
Here's a snippet of that Surly/Scribe post:
A Shortcut To Thinking Is Not Thinking " S U R L Y & S C R I B E L.A. Kings Hockey Blog
Since there is some friction from certain media types (or, more accurately, one) about our Drew Doughty news and since this comes from someone who I respected (and still do) but who has probably never read the site, let’s get a few things straight: A deal in principle (having handled hundreds before they came to fruition or needed further tweaking, which I am not sure this person can say for himself) is not the same thing as a "done deal." I chose my words carefully for that reason.
Here's the thing though. The whole point of saying there's a "deal in principle" is to make it sound like there's a deal, leaving out the part that a "deal in principle" simply means that the two parties have the intent to complete a deal in the future. Some people will define "deal in principle" to mean that the broad strokes of a future agreement have been laid out, but the details have yet to be negotiated. Which means there is no deal, because there is no deal until there is nothing left to negotiate and both parties sign.
The implication -- to your average fans -- of saying that Doughty and the Kings have a deal "in principle" is that (the fan will imagine) the salary and term have been agreed upon and there's just a bunch of pesky secretarial details to be ironed out. But the main reason this is misleading is that the form of the standard player contract (SPC) is provided by the CBA and may not be altered. All the parties do is provide the salary in each year, the signing bonus (if any), the deferred salary (if any), and the presence or absence of a no-move or no-trade clause, when the player is eligible for one. Everything else is boilerplate. This is why players are able to lock in binding contracts within seconds of 9am on 7/1. Because once you agree on money and term, it's quite easy to be done.
That's also why if the deal isn't signed, it's also not "close." If a deal isn't signed, it means that the sides are in disagreement on money, term or NTC/NMCs.
Now, to the one who claims the source is not legitimate, how is it that we are breaking news hours, days and sometimes over a week before anyone else [...]? Do you think we are just really good "guessers"?
I still don't know who he's referring to here. Maybe you guys do. I read Surly & Scribe every time a new post pops up in Google Reader, and I don't have any recollection of them "breaking" stories. I'm not saying they didn't. But to answer their rhetorical question, yeah, I think most people who report rumors are just guessing.
For example, it doesn't take a genius to "guess" that Nicolas Deslauriers is going to be getting an ELC in the days before 6/1/2011, because (1) he's great and (2) he has to get a contract by that date or the Kings lose his rights. So it's easy to say, "I've heard Deslauriers is about to be signed." Without any sources at all, I put it a different way at the time: Deslauriers will be signed before 6/1. Not because I heard something. But because I know what the rules are.
Similarly, it doesn't take a genius to "guess" that Doughty and the Kings have a contract "in principle." Because that phrase is meaningless. Since the three things we know are that there is no deal, they've been negotiating, and Doughty is Kings' property no matter what, it's easy to say that "a deal is coming", "soon," "imminently," they're "close," whatever. Because soon and/or close are in the eye of the beholder. The same goes for "we told you Lombardi had Doughty's offer"... that doesn't mean anything either. They're negotiating. By definition, there's an offer on the table from either side, which either side is welcome to call up and accept at any point.
Some rumors are just made up and have no basis in reality. Others are just common sense repackaged as inside information. In this case, I really didn't read Rich Hammond's post as in any way optimistic that a deal was close with a few details to be worked out. I would characterize Hammond's post as falling decidedly on the side of "things are not close and don't be surprised if they aren't close any time soon." And I would characterize the S&S post as falling decidedly (with disclaimers, of course) on the side of "good things are happening you heard it here first."
I see no reason to accept Hammond's pessimism as validation of Surly & Scribe's optimism.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Take the quote in context
“I think it’s fair to say that in the last conversation, we set the parameters, as to where we feel his contract should be. We talked about a number of scenarios, and I guess now it’s their move. They never really responded."
The word “we” is used 3 times. You think Lombardi is saying each time that the Kings set the parameters as to where the Kings feel his contract should be and the Kings talked about a number of scenarios? Since Dean is referring to a discussion that took place between he and Doughty’s agent, I doubt seriously that “we” is used to refer to he and the LA Kings especially when he specifically says “we talked about a number of scenarios”. Unless Dean is fond of speaking to himself during phone calls with others, “we” is reasonably referring to the A and the B having the conversation. He and Doughty’s agents talked about a number of scenarios. Not, he and himself or he and his own people in that phone call.
But, I suppose any statement can be interpreted differently and an argument can form as to what someone meant to say.
Regarding the rest of the article, you think the term deal in principle is meaningless but it is used in negotiations in every context on a regular basis. I have negotiated large 7 figure ones and once a deal in principle is reached (which means the range or parameters are set and now more work goes into the details and getting the parties to compromise and meet somewhere in the middle of those parameters usually), so long as the parties continue to negotiate in good faith, the deal is finalized. That could still take a while but it’s a huge step. Now, this is an 8 figure deal, long term and likely has other components than just length and money. That is also why we wrote the devil is very much in the details.
re “we” — actually I think the third “we” is definitively Lombardi and Meehan, the second “we” is probably Lombardi and Meehan but it’s unclear what he means by “set” the parameters (for example, I can’t tell if there’s an agreement — “yes we both agree that the deal should be in the neighborhood of $6.5MM” — or a disparity — “you think it should be $7.5MM, I think it should be $6MM”), and the second “we” is probably Lombardi and co, and not Meehan. In any case, to the extent that any disagreement can be called “setting the parameters” (Doughty’s demand and Lombardi’s offer being the upper and lower boundary of the parameters), the news that there are parameters is exactly as meaningful as “a deal in principle.”
re “deal in principle”
It doesn’t do much good to use your resume to argue your point. I could do the same and it wouldn’t be convincing for either of us. I’m not doubting that that you hear the phrase all the time. So do I. I will just say that in my business — in which there is also a lag time (usually weeks and sometimes months) between the moment the major points of the deal are agreed upon and when the actual final contract is signed — the term “deal in principle” is not the phrase to describe that first important moment. The phrase we use is: “the deal is closed.” When the deal is “closed” everything you say about good faith and so on is true. When you have a “deal in principle” (in my business) you have nothing. And here’s how I know I have nothing in that case: if a deal that was “closed” falls apart in the vetting of the contract, it’s legally actionable and I will get paid. if I have a deal in principle that subsequently falls apart, there’s nothing, it’s gone.
All of which is slightly off-topic. I just don’t think that saying “deal in principle” sounds like it means what you say it means. i.e. it sounds better than it is. Sort of like “no pain killer stops headache pain faster than Tylenol.” (no pain killer stops it slower either)
Wait till this year.
about deal in principle
I find Quisp’s explanation far more convincing. I’m for “Evidence”. Even if there is none of that one way or another, the whole ‘in principle’ thing sounds ‘cool’ but there really isn’t much meat in it. OK. So where is your Evidence? It had better be good…. very good. Otherwise for me this is just more machinations on something that is just going into drama as far as I’m concerned.
DL
You mentioned that DL does not telegraph his moves, and that is absolutely correct.
One thing I believe we all should have learned is that DL strikes in ways that no one can predict. His moves seem almost out of the blue.
I would not say that DL intentionally leads us astray, but it almost appears that way when the move actually takes place. We are looking over here and the action is over there.
That probably explains why we are always checking in, looking for updates. When things seem the most idle is when we are most likely to have something occur.
DL's quotes are almost always open to interpretation
And I told Bobby as much last night, that many people would interpret “we” as being the Kings’ organization. There is no way to definitely know without asking him what he meant there. I lean towards ‘we’ being him and Meehan. It would be weird for him to use the term ‘we’ in the same sentence three times and have it refer to different parties.
My only problem with you post Quisp is that you say "That’s also why if the deal isn’t signed, it’s also not “close.” If a deal isn’t signed, it means that the sides are in disagreement on money, term or NTC/NMCs."
This is just too black and white for someone as smart as you. You are not at all allowing for progress. You say it’s either done or far apart… which sounds a little short sighted to me. If sides start polarized, and slowly move closer towards the middle, or one side closer to the other pole, is that not getting close or closer? Why can a contract only be signed or not close?
The big issue here is that people have been looking at this negotiation only one way. That is. “Doughty wants a ton of money, DL doesn’t want to give it to him.”
It may have started that way. But parameters being set and deal in principle mean that this is not the case. It means that they are in pretty good agreement about how long each side wants the contract to be as well as about how much money each side is good with spending/receiving. That means the deal is closer than when it began. If you don’t like the euphemism ‘deal in principle’, that’s fine, but acknowledge it as a matter or parsing terms as opposed to a diametrically opposed construct of thought.
Now, going back to ‘we’, also ask yourself this: if “we” was strictly referring to the Kings organization when he says parameters were set, why would that happen only two weeks ago? That would mean that before that time, the Kings organization hadn’t decided what they were willing to pay Doughty. While possible, I find it very hard to believe that it took Dean up until two weeks to decide with Hextall, Solomon and Leiweke where abouts they wanted Drew’s contract to fall. What is much more likely is that Dean has known “I want to the contract to be about here” the whole time, and that two weeks ago, the change was that the two parties came to an agreement about where they wanted the contract to be. This doesn’t mean done. This doesn’t mean it has to or will get signed soon. All this means is that they are much closer than Drew saying “I deserve $7+ mill a year!” and Dean responding with “F*** you, I’ll give no more than $6”… which is what people seem to believe what is happening. I attribute this strictly to narrow thinking that says “it’s either far apart and hostile” or its to be imminently signed, with far too little room for grey area in between.
by Surly Jacob (JDM) on Aug 11, 2011 10:29 AM PDT reply actions
Having just read a list of absurd Summer over payments I Doughty and Meehan would be foolish to not shoot beyond the moon…and I picture a push back that responsible GMs feel is needed to rein in what I consider run away salary agreements.
Its interesting to dive into the business of hockey and debate various “reads between the lines” but in the end this may well establish contract precedent moving forward in the post cap era. As such it best be a battle royal.
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
i agree that there is such a thing as progress in a negotiation, but i also think it's pretty black and white. i think the problem is that i haven't explained myself very well.
possibly it’s deserving of its own post. the short version is, it’s (closer to) black and white because there just isn’t very much they’re allowed to negotiate. Money, term, no-move/no-trade.
Wait till this year.
I think there’s a gap between “Irreconcilable differences, Doughty’s about to hold out/request a trade” and “there’s basically a lower and an upper boundary set, they’re haggling over things like paying a good deal of it up front, or a NM/NTC.”
So I guess in my mind, there are shades of grey between deal and no deal.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
I think gray also as I am inclined to stick with my feeling that a contract trend is being established along with a new cost basis.
Negotiations based upon a player’s potential will become increasingly frequent. In response GMs will need greater control of NMC/NTCs (escape hatches).
I think my idea fits the context of a “new” NHL system of developing players, spot lighting them when they are affordable and moving them along to distribute moderate to high salaried players evenly across the league.
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
yes, there are shades of grey between deal and no deal
but all of those shades = no deal.
of course, i agree with you to the extent that it’s a dance and the dance has steps and as you proceed you get to know your partner and get potentially closer to the end of the song.
but there’s really no reason not to close a deal if all they’re waiting on is minor shit. The only reason to wait is to force somebody’s hand. and you don’t force people’s hand over nothing. it’s over stuff you want.
Wait till this year.
Scott Boras routinely sets up deals for his baseball draftees months in advance and then doesn’t return a team’s calls until right before the signing deadline to actually accept the deal. I don’t know why, but he does.
It’s not outside the realm of possibility that Meehan is waiting just because he can.
I can see both sides just waiting because they can.
Why end the game? Doughty’s probably going to have to step in sometime, but why now?
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
One reason to get it done now is because of bad publicity for both sides. The longer he isn’t signed it makes LA look cheap, not attractive to players, hard to deal with management, etc. For Doughty it makes him look greedy, not committed to the team/winning over money, people question his desire/fitness, etc. I’m not saying these are reasonable opinions or justified and most will blow them off but they will start to be said by some people and it won’t be good for either side.
It doesn’t seem to have done Bobby Ryan any harm. When the contract comes out, then people will judge. LA can’t look cheap to players before then (and frankly, after throwing so much $$$ B. Richards’ way, I don’t think that’s the general impression).
I think fans like us just want it over yesterday, but there’s no real deadline till training camp.
I know people are starting to throw out insults Doughty’s way, but a lot of it just seems like an extension of all the crit that began this season. So I don’t see much difference there. I get what you’re saying, though.
There are certainly areas he can/should improve, but it gets so amplified I think we’re starting to take for granted he’s a special player. It’s been weird.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
by Niesy on Aug 12, 2011 1:56 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Plus, he has chubby cheeks
For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled.
That’s true, it didn’t really harm Ryan. My point is more that the potential is there for a PR hit for both sides because it takes longer so I don’t think they would agree to some sort of deal in principle and wait another few weeks to announce it. I think the waiting is a strategy by both sides to put pressure and get a better deal because they haven’t agreed yet on where the contract should fall instead of just waiting because we can so why not.
Dean wouldn’t wait because he can. He said at the draft he wants this done as soon as possible so Drew can focus on getting prepared for the season.
For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled.
You realize he then proceeded to go deliberately incommunicado with the other side, right? He had a counter offer and made no reply for weeks. Not exactly front-burner stuff.
It’s a strategy both are fine with employing. “Maybe as time passes they’ll realize we’re not going to give up any more, and they’ll yield.”
We also know (from him) that Doughty is still talking to the coaches and is still preparing for the regular season. Dean can say it’s urgent because he wants the other side to fold ASAP, but it’s not actually affecting his preparation.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
I like to think Dean said he was going to sign Drew quickly but then forgot. “I know there was something I was supposed to do… what was it… wait, shit!” (*writes contract while hurriedly putting on pants)
That’s probably why his quotes to LAT were so weird.
“Status of the Doughty negotiations? Ah. Ah yes. That guy. Right. Ummmmmm….oh! Can you hold a minute?”
Oh shit oh shit oh shit, I knew there was something!
“Hey, Helene? Haha. Yes. Focused on negotiations for raising the debt ceiling now. Yes, you can quote me on that. No, that’s all I have to say. Goodbye"
Helene Elliott: “What in the worl—”
(dial tone)
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
I’m convinced he takes great joy in messing with Helene.
For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled.
For a second I thought you were combining Rudy's "putting on pants" with talking to Helene...until I got to dial tone
Wait till this year.
I have written many weird parodies
None THAT weird.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
by Niesy on Aug 12, 2011 5:18 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
That doesn’t mean anything. Dean wants to come to an agreement quickly within reason. Meehan wants to draw it out to set the bar high for 2nd contract defenseman (which will help his wallet with Schenn). They told Meehan what ballpark they were in, Meehan probably came back with $7 a season (guess) and Lombardi said no. His salary cap hit is almost as important as Drew himself so he can’t just say “oh screw it, we need Drew too much to draw this out”. Finally, if Jack Johnson can negotiate a 7 yr contract for 4.3 without an agent I don’t think Lombardi isn’t offering up something reasonable. It ain’t him. (It ain’t Drew either, but his agent).
For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled.
Well I see assumptions that Meehan wants to draw it out, and I agree, but it is a known fact that DL has employed that tactic himself, and feels time is on his side (if he wants to play, Drew will have to take one of the offered contracts).
I think he wants to come to an agreement quickly within reason by having Doughty’s agents just capitulate now. Which would be ideal.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
--opps, double post...it mistakenly posted further down...
I imagine the relative importance of each of the three elements have changed, whereas pre cap their relative individual importance was better defined. Forsaking old trends to establishing new could take time….If I’m on the right track.
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
damn things were suppose to post to Quisps comment
another great blogtard moment brought to you by USHA#17
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
Yes but within money, term, NMC...
There are several variables. Such as: We agree Drew is worth X amount of X years. OK, now we discuss the cash distribution of that X dollars for which of X years. And the NMC… there are so many ways to alter an NMC, such as conditions and different amounts of veto power or lists of teams submitted, etc. So while they may not be close to the point of putting ink to paper, that does not mean they aren’t close on money and term and vaguely on NMC/NTC.
by Surly Jacob (JDM) on Aug 11, 2011 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree there is more of a gray area. However, the big thing that sticks out to me is that it has been a few weeks with no contact at all. Let’s say they did have a rough agreement on things as you say then wouldn’t they be talking more often to try to polish off the details and get it done rather than not talk for weeks. The no contact makes me think it is far more likely that DL has a number in mind and Meehan has a number and neither is willing to bend YET so there is no contact. Eventually they will compromise and work something out (or DD holds out into training camp). I’d agree it doesn’t mean that the contract negotiations are angry or that bad feelings are building up on either side. There is still a lot of time and no point in really giving in and rushing yet until closer to camp and that deadline to get things done.
Dudes, look at what we're arguing about...
Gotta love the off-season!
by 88fingerslukee on Aug 11, 2011 10:33 AM PDT reply actions
I'm confused
The comments have been a lot to go through. Is the issue here that it’s hard to tell whether Surly and Scribe posted something based on actual reporting or just gave their own speculations?
"After months of reading other people’s catchy sigs (like yours), I decided I needed one, too." -- DougX
by VoluminousTuna on Aug 13, 2011 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Okay, after more digging, I get how the catfight started. The tl;dr version of all of this is that Surly and Scribe interpreted facts from LAKI in a way that would verify what their mystery source said, but since it’s interpretation, it’s . . . up to interpretation. S&S wants their reporting to be respected, and Quisp is saying let’s not jump to conclusions. There are no winners.
A word of advice for Surly and Scribe—if you’re really reporting based on facts (that you can concretely present), you don’t need to defend yourselves. The reporting will stand up on its own.
"After months of reading other people’s catchy sigs (like yours), I decided I needed one, too." -- DougX
by VoluminousTuna on Aug 13, 2011 12:45 AM PDT up reply actions
It occurs to me that this is one way of squaring the circle:
That is, of reconciling the optimistic and pessimistic readings of the current situation. To wit:
Both sides are essentially engaged in a staring contest, but it’s not really a hostile contest. Both sides know that Drew will sign with the Kings, that it won’t come to a long, contentious hold-out because nobody wins in that situation and there’s really not much point. The differences in the only things that matter: money, term, NTC/NMC are not so great that they can’t be easily reconciled. But because the reality is that sooner or later Drew will sign with the Kings before camp, both sides are trying while they can to make the other sweat a little to see if they can get the better of it.
The team isn’t training together anyway at this point, so as long as Drew keeps training and touching base with John Stevens, it’s only us fans who are suffering. And since when have we really mattered anyway? :-/
"I think you just outed yourself as Dean Lombardi. I knew it all along." — Rudy Kelly
I'm just mad
That I left my Doughty jersey at the bottom of my hockey bag last week and some of the lettering (specifically the 8) got stained.
by MyFavBaseballSquadron on Aug 12, 2011 12:54 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Jewels From The Crown
Related FanShots on Jewels From The Crown
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
