if this is true (and remember this is just edmonton’s side of the story), then it does not reflect well on nylander at all.

also, if this is true, will washington have to compensate the oilers in some way?

Posted by fredster on 07/03/07 at 06:14 PM ET

Fredster, any comment now from anyone besides the parties involved would just be speculation.
Best to see how it washes out.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 07/03/07 at 06:17 PM ET

Oilers got screwed. I guess Nylander was just using the Oilers for leverage.

Posted by bcrt on 07/03/07 at 06:20 PM ET

I think there is some sort of precedent by the way. I know in the Lindros case, the Nords made the deal first, and it was verbally agreed on, and then the Rangers made the deal and it was done officially. The arbitrator gave the verdict to the Nords. If this does end up going to arbitration some how, I would think that the Oilers have the advantage based on that precedent.

Posted by bcrt on 07/03/07 at 06:23 PM ET

err… Flyers, not Nords

Posted by bcrt on 07/03/07 at 06:28 PM ET

That wasn’t a free agent situation, it was a trade, bcrt.

Posted by K24 from NYC on 07/03/07 at 06:33 PM ET

Until the paperwork’s filed with and approved by the league, a deal isn’t a deal.  That might be the case here.

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 07/03/07 at 06:58 PM ET

Washington isn’t really involved in this, as I understand it.

From the artcle “Mr. Gillis confirmed same to the Oilers in writing.”; what’s really at stake here is Nylander’s agent’s career. I think that’s who the Oilers are miffed at, and rightfully so in my opinion.

Posted by Scott from Calgary, AB on 07/03/07 at 07:25 PM ET

Strange situation. Is it possible the agent spoke too soon without conferring with Nylander? I mean, that would be really bad on the agent’s part, but could it be what happened? It’s all speculation from us outsiders, but I don’t see how accepting a deal he didn’t really want could possibly help in negotiations. Maybe he thought the Caps would give up a little more cash at the last minute? Speaking as a Caps fan, I hope something the agent or Nylander did doesn’t screw us up, but I also hope the Oil didn’t get screwed by them either. That seems to be what the Oilers are saying did happen, though.

Posted by false_cause from DC on 07/03/07 at 07:26 PM ET

K24: Its the only precedent however. That ruling pretty much stated that a verbal agreement is binding between two teams. The question is whether they would also apply that between a team and a player. It is far more unfair what happened to the Oilers than the Flyers, since the Oilers lost out so many other free agents because Nylander/his agent verbally agreed to the deal.

Posted by bcrt on 07/03/07 at 08:03 PM ET

It is far more unfair what happened to the Oilers than the Flyers

I think you meant the Rangers, not Flyers, since the Flyers did indeed get Lindros.

And as much as I like Nylander, this does seem to be somewhat of a repeat occurrence.  He fired his agent at the end of the season, reportedly because the agent agreed to a deal with the Rangers that Nylander didn’t agree to.  Then he hires Gillis and the same thing happens with the Oilers.

Posted by K24 from NYC on 07/03/07 at 08:12 PM ET

No, before it went to arbitration, the Flyers were in the Oilers position. They had the verbal agreement before the Nords went and made the trade official with the Rangers.

Posted by bcrt on 07/03/07 at 08:35 PM ET

I guess we’re just misunderstanding each other, because I meant that the Flyers still ended up with the player they wanted, and the Rangers didn’t, much like the Oilers didn’t.

Posted by K24 from NYC on 07/03/07 at 09:54 PM ET

Options for the Oilers…

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 07/04/07 at 08:02 AM ET

K24, I’m not misunderstanding what you are saying. But I’m saying something totally different.

BEFORE the Lindros thing went to arbitration, heres how things went down:

1. Quebec verbally agrees to a deal with Philadelphia.
2. Quebec inks an official deal with the Rangers

BEFORE the arbitration, Philly was in the same position as the Oilers, they agreed to a deal first, even though they didn’t do the paperwork, Quebec told Philly it was a done deal. Philly were the ones burning up inside, because Quebec turns around and makes an official deal with the Rangers AFTER telling Philly it was a done deal.

Posted by bcrt on 07/04/07 at 08:17 AM ET

Sorry bcrt, I meant we were misunderstanding each other because we were arguing about two different points in time.

Posted by K24 from NYC on 07/04/07 at 10:45 AM ET