The arbitration process grants eligible Restricted Free Agents (RFAs) an avenue
 to receive fair salaries for their play. However, it is one of the most
misunderstood elements of the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). While
it does give players additional ways to receive fair pay, it is not a one-sided
 process. NHL teams do have options if the arbitrator's eventual ruling isn';t
in their favour. Cody Ceci';s arbitration case during the summer of 2018
provided one instance where the team, the Ottawa Senators, should have
considered those options.Codi Ceci was awarded a $4.3 million contract from the
 Ottawa Senators in arbitration. (Greg M. Cooper-USA TODAY Sports)Restricted
Free Agency

A free agent';s status, whether restricted or unrestricted, is governed largely
 by age and professional experience. Cody Ceci found himself an RFA for the
second time in his career this off-season, despite having already accrued five
NHL seasons of playing experience.

To retain the rights to an RFA, a team must tender a qualifying offer. These
qualifying offers are based upon a player's salary in the preceding season and
the number of NHL games played. The offer cannot be less than the player's
salary in the preceding season, and if the player has played more than 180 NHL
games, it must be one-way.

Ceci's expiring two-year contract paid him a salary of $3.35 million in the
2017-18 season and he has played 366 NHL games in his career. The Senators
qualifying offer to Ceci simply satisfied the CBA mandated minimums, $3.35
million on a one-year contract.

Select RFAs are eligible for salary arbitration which, as mentioned before,
offers players the opportunity to argue for a higher salary based on their
performance. Like their RFA status, a player';s eligibility for arbitration is
governed by the age at which they signed their first contract and how much
professional playing time they have accrued. Ceci is a player who qualified for
 those arbitration rights, and he opted for salary arbitration after receiving
the qualifying offer from the Senators.The Arbitration Process

Before an arbitration hearing takes place both sides submit written briefs that
 include the salary they are seeking. Just like the qualifying offer the
subsequent arbitration salary amount offered by Ottawa was for the CBA mandated
 minimum, $3.35 million. Ceci's camp countered with an amount of $6 million.
Once the written briefs were submitted a hearing was scheduled for Aug. 1.

Arbitration for Ceci (OTT). Team offer is $3.35M. Player ask is $6M.

- Elliotte Friedman (@FriedgeHNIC) July 30, 2018

Leading up to a scheduled hearing, the team and player have the opportunity to
reach a deal on a new contract and avoid the arbitration hearing. Despite
having time to reach an agreement, the sides were not able to settle finalize a
 new contract before the hearing date. Because of this, the arbitrator heard
the case as scheduled on August 1.

After the hearing is completed the arbitrator has 48 hours to rule on the
matter. In other professional sports, like Major League Baseball, the
arbitrator is obliged to pick one salary amount or the other. The NHL, however,
 allows the arbitrator to select a salary amount anywhere between the two
salaries proposed by the team and the league. This often leads to decisions
that fall exactly in the middle of the two submitted salaries, as was the case
with Jacob Trouba's new one-year deal worth $5.5 million which fell exactly
between the submitted salaries of $4 million and $7 million.Jets defenseman
Jacob Trouba was another high profile arbitration case this offseason. (Dennis
Wierzbicki-USA TODAY Sports)

On August 3, the arbitrator awarded Ceci a one-year deal for $4.3 million,
slightly below the midpoint of the two proposed amounts. Had the arbitrator
split the difference between the salaries, he would have awarded a salary of
$4.665 million.What Options Did Ottawa Have?

One interesting element of player-elected salary arbitration is the option for
a team to walk away from the contract awarded by the arbitrator if it exceeds a
 certain dollar value. The amount increases each season by the same amount the
average player salary increases, ie. in 2017-18 player salaries increased by
10%, therefore salary for walk-away rights would increase by 10%. According to
CapFriendly.com the walk-away amount for the 2018-19 season is $4,222,941. If
the team chooses to walk away from the award, the player immediately becomes a
UFA.

Despite the arbitrator';s award being lower than some might have expected, this
 amount still exceeded $4,222,941 and therefore Ottawa had the option to walk
away from the award. Had Ottawa done this Ceci would have immediately become a
UFA.

Before the hearing, there were a number of Tweets and blog posts from fans and
analysts discussing the idea of the Senators walking away from Ceci if his
arbitration award was high enough to do so. These posts largely focused on
Ceci's on-ice performance. Arguments ranged from ones citing his poor
plus/minus during the 2017-18 season to more in-depth analyses based on
advanced stats to justify parting with the blueliner.

Cody Ceci turned the puck over on 16.4% of his defensive zone possessions last
season. That ranked him 232nd out of 272 qualified defenceman. Yet, it ranked
3rd best amongst Senators defencemen. So, that's pretty much where Ceci and the
 Senators are at.

- Mike Kelly (@MikeKellyNHL) August 3, 2018

Another argument, aside from his on-ice performance, is the economic impact the
 contract will have on the club.

For the 2018-19 season, the salary cap is not a significant factor for Ottawa
in the case of the Ceci contract, but the more important issue would be the
true salary value of the contract.

Ottawa has shown themselves to be a budget team and there has been no shortage
of reporting on the financial health of the organization. Their penny pinching
is so well known that players, like now-former Senators captain Erik Karlsson,
have spoken publicly about the challenges the team is facing.Erik Karlsson has
spoken publicly in the past about the financial situation in Ottawa. (Amy Irvin
 / The Hockey Writers)

Moreover, beyond reports and anecdotes, the Senators'; payroll also
demonstrates the club's aversion to spending. In both the 2015-16 and 2016-17
seasons they were in the bottom third of the league in terms of total cap hit.
In 2017-18 they were in the middle of the pack. However, according to
CapFriendly.com Clarke MacArthur's salary was 80% covered by insurance because
of his injury. If that 80% is not included their cap total for the season,
their cap hit would fall again to the bottom third.

Whether teams are most concerned about the on-ice performance of a player, or
financial matters, it is only prudent for teams to carefully examine all of the
 available options. For a team like Ottawa, there is a very reasonable argument
 that they would be better off exercising their rights under the CBA and
walking away from arbitration awards like the one Cody Ceci received.

The post Ceci and the Senators: A Case Study in Salary Arbitration appeared
first on The Hockey Writers.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheHockeyWrite...
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
 * Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)