CBA FAQ, Chapter 2: Restricted Free Agent Status
Chapter 2 of this FAQ is going to focus on what RFA status means and how RFA status is determined. RFA contract negotiations will be discussed in Chapter 3.
Special Definition for Article 10:From Section 10.2.a: "First SPC Signing Age" means a Player's age on September 15 of the calendar year in which he signs an SPC regardless of his actual age on the date he signs such SPC.
Who is a Group 2 Restricted Free Agent?
Any player who will not qualify for UFA status at the end of their current contract, or most recent contract if it has already expired, but has met the experience requirements to become a free agent, will be an RFA and will be subject to the negotiating limitations discussed in CBA Article 10. Unless the player qualifies for "Defected Player" status, as defined later in this article, they will be a Group 2 RFA.
This is the standard category for players who are under 27 years of age (on June 30th) and have less than seven (7) years of NHL experience; assuming they do not meet the special requirements for Group 6 UFA status.
To qualify to become a Group 2 RFA, a player must meet the experience requirements to become a free agent. From 10.2.a.i:
(i) (A) Any Player who meets the qualifications set forth in the following chart and:
(1) is not a Group 1 Player or a Group 4 Player, and
(2) is not an Unrestricted Free Agent, shall be deemed to be a "Group 2 Player" and shall, at the expiration of his SPC, become a Restricted Free Agent. ...
First SPC Signing Age Eligible for Group 2 Free Agency
18 - 21 3 years professional experience
22 - 23 2 years professional experience
24 or older 1 year professional experience
For the purposes of this Section 10.2(a), a Player aged 18 or 19 earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more NHL Games in a given NHL Season, and a Player aged 20 or older (or who turns 20 between September 16 and December 31 of the year in which he signs his first SPC) earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more Professional Games under an SPC in a given League Year.
These requirements are the same as the length of time that a player must stay in the Entry Level system and the mandated duration of his ELC, as defined in Article 9. So if a player does not meet these requirements, he’s still party to an ELC and is not a free agent at all.
What does it really mean to be a Restricted Free Agent?
An RFA continues to have an obligation to their current club even after their SPC expires. Even though they are a free agent and are not currently signed to an SPC, their club owns their rights and can prevent them from signing with another team. In these cases, the clubs hold more leverage than the player does.
Are they free to negotiate with other teams?
Yes, they are free to negotiate with other teams, but they are limited by the privileges held by their parent club. As defined in Section 10.2.a:
Any such Player shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with any such Player, subject to the provisions set forth in this Section.
This definition is inherently misleading, because it makes RFA negotiations seem like a straightforward process. The provisions referred to in this definition are the processes of Offer Sheets, Right of First Refusal, and RFA Compensation; which will all be discussed individually.
How does a club maintain the rights to their RFAs?
Normally, a club maintains the negotiating rights to their RFAs by submitting them a Qualifying Offer prior to the expiration of their contract. This Qualifying Offer must meet the minimum criteria required for the individual player, determined by their previous salary (without bonuses) and accounting for their playing experience.
Alternately, if the player is eligible for arbitration, the club can maintain their negotiating rights to a player using Club-Elected Salary Arbitration. In this case, the club does not have to issue a Qualifying Offer and the player is no longer free to negotiate with any other club in the league. No player can be subjected to club-elected arbitration more than once in their career, even if they settle before the hearing takes place, as defined in Section 12.3.c.
What is the deadline for making a Qualifying Offer?
As defined in Section 10.2.a.(ii):
In order to receive a Right of First Refusal or Draft Choice Compensation, the Prior Club of a Restricted Free Agent must tender to the Player, no later than 5:00 p.m. New York time on the later of June 25 or the first Monday after the Entry Draft of the final year of the Player's SPC, a "Qualifying Offer" ...
What happens if a club chooses not to issue a Qualifying Offer?
The Player immediately becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent, as defined in Section 10.2.a.(iv):
In the event a Prior Club fails to make a Qualifying Offer as set forth in this Section 10.2 and fails to elect salary arbitration pursuant to Section 12.3(a), the Player shall immediately become an Unrestricted Free Agent and shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with any such Player, without penalty or restriction or being subject to any Right of First Refusal, Draft Choice Compensation, or any other compensation or equalization obligation of any kind.
If the player signs a new SPC that will expire before they meet the qualifications for UFA status, they will once again be subject to restricted free agency and their rights will be owned by their new team.
Are RFAs eligible for salary arbitration?
Arbitration is only available to RFAs, but an individual must meet the experience requirements defined in Section 12.1.a:
(a) A Player is eligible for salary arbitration if the Player meets the qualifications set forth in the following chart and in Section 12.1(b) below:
First SPC Signing Age Minimum to be Eligible for Salary Arbitration
18-20 4 years professional experience
21 3 years professional experience
22-23 2 years professional experience
24 and older 1 year professional experience
This topic will be fully discussed as part of Salary Arbitration. Please note that a player who signs their Entry Level Contract at age 18, 19, or 20 cannot be eligible for arbitration at the expiration of their ELC, because an ELC has a maximum length of 3 years.
Who is a Defected Player (Group 4)?
A Defected Player is any player who has unfulfilled obligations to an NHL team, and is either not playing or playing outside of North America while contracted to another team. Due to the lengthy nature of this topic, it will be covered in its own section.
Do the rights to a Defected Player ever expire?
The rights to a Defected or Group 4 player can last indefinitely, but only if the club chooses to maintain them. Whenever that player’s contract to a club outside of North America ends (either by expiring or the club and/or league folds), the club owning his rights must extend him a minimum Qualifying Offer. If they do so, they continue to retain his rights and the Right of First Refusal if he signs with another NHL club.
Disclaimer: The content in this CBA FAQ is based on my own interpretation of the wording in the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement, unless a link to the source of another person's interpretation is explicitly provided. The full PDF document of the 2005 CBA is available for public download from the CBA section of NHL.com. I will do my best to ensure the accuracy of each article, but I welcome any comments, feedback, and discussion to improve and/or correct each section.
This item was written by a member of this community and is not necessarily endorsed by Broad Street Hockey.
26 comments
|
Add comment
|
12 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Re: The format
I struggled with whether or not to make the FAQ an actual list of questions, or to make it read like a guide. Ultimately, I decided to hybridize it; and use individual questions as section headings but still have the chapter read almost like a book. I did this so that in the future, when there’s a hub, the list of questions could appear there and then link to the right chapter. The difficulty for me was knowing that some of you are going to want to read this cover to cover as each chapter is posted, and trying to make it user friendly for that as well.
If you feel strongly either for or against the format I chose, let me know below.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
Yeah, this was good. I thought the topics flowed to the next one well contextually, but this can still easily be used as a reference guide in the future to quickly jump to the topic I want to re-read.
Contributor at The Brotherly Game, SBN's Philadelphia Union blog
Agree with both Ben and Eric
The hybrid format is a ‘best of both worlds’ kind of thing. Stick with it.
you're not defending him are you?
are you his mom?
by toppleprone on Jun 7, 2011 9:43 PM EDT
I find the whole idea really useful. I tried to read sections of the CBA once – what a waste of time and energy. As bad as anything written by Congress.
si vis Stanley Cup, para bellum
NO. Congress is far worse.
/actually read both the entire Stimulus bill of 2009, as well as the CBA. I’m not joking.
In preparation for NHL free agency, thinking of changing my screen name to Bhudde in 10OC.
I’m with you, Bud. At least in the CBA, as bad as it is, I’m pretty sure everything somehow relates to hockey. On top of how confusing the writing is with Congress’ stuff, the things they hide inside can come out of left field, there’s no way to predict what they’ll throw into a bill.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 11, 2011 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Some maybe (hopefully) helpful suggestions...
I also like the hybrid style, but I want to read as little of the actual CBA as possible… just critical information (like the eligibility ages) and funny and/or untranslatable verbiage. For example, I skipped over the quote in the answer to “What happens if a club chooses not to issue a Qualifying Offer?”. Not a very big deal
Another suggestion is to move the “Are RFAs eligible for salary arbitration?” section to just below the paragraph that starts:
Alternately, if the player is eligible for arbitration, the club can maintain…
I got a little lost while reading through because I was compelled to scroll down to see the arbitration eligibility guidelines and then had trouble finding my spot at the Qualifying Offer deadline question. Just thought it might help the read-through-ability.
And lastly a question: is club-elected arbitration any different from plain old everyday arbitration?
It's a hockey, you know. it's only... it's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
Arbitration is going to be it’s own chapter (currently slated to be Chapter 4), but in club-elected arbitration the players right are taken away. If the player himself elects arbitration, he willingly gives up his right to try to get another team to give him an offer sheet. If the club elects it; he has no power to stop it. That’s why no player can have to go through it more than once.
I’m trying to limit the CBA language where I can, and edit and emphasize to make it easier, but I can’t do away with it. If I write everything out in my own words, we’ll start to have issues when people disagree with my conclusion, and I’ll have to go back and add the documentation. I’ll go back through the above post and add emphasis to the most important words in that definition, but I won’t be able to get through the FAQ without evidence (and in some cases, examples). I know it’s a lot of information, but no one will believe my conclusions unless I can prove them. Try to let me know when it’s really way too much, but it’s going to have to always be there in some way.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 11, 2011 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I added some bold emphasis to those two definitions, so you can just read the important words and skip the rest of it. I actually had intended to do that anyway, so thanks for reminding me that I missed it.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 11, 2011 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Great work. I also prefer the question format.
One suggestion, and it’s something Eric is probably used to: I do much better with examples and conclusions than I do with broad statements and guidelines. I know this doesn’t make much sense coming from a law student, but that’s me.
So I would enjoy an example of guys who are affected by the September 15th date both ways, and so forth. I don’t think this is a huge problem in this post, but a guy like Danny Syvret – who everybody thought was RFA this year – would probably be a good example of what this all means.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jul 11, 2011 10:12 PM EDT reply actions
This is where it gets sticky, where do I define Syvret? I was planning to put him under the explanation for Group 6 UFAs, in the UFA chapter (which is soon). Eventually I’ll try to link the interconnected definitions, so that when you read the group 2 part above that says “unless he qualifies to be a group 6 free agent”, the words “group 6” can be a link to their definition in the UFA chapter. Let me know if you think that idea won’t work.
Figuring out where to cut things off is a huge problem; everything has so many dependencies, but it would be redundant to explain it in each spot where it’s needed. Obviously there’s stuff here that will make more sense after I get through the contract negotiation part, but this post would have been about 3 times as long if I had kept it all together. I had to split it in half to make it digestible. I was originally trying to include the defected player explanation (and the Patrick Thoresen example) in this chapter; but that alone was 2+ full pages in Word when I decided it had to be its own topic.
To you guys it might seem like throwing this list of questions together is easy, but I’m agonizing over trying to order the questions so that they flow and determining when I’ve said enough and reference a future answer. If it all looks easy and makes sense when I post it, know that I worked really hard to make it seem that way.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 11, 2011 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions
How about an example-oriented FAQ as the final chapter?
“Why was Syvret a UFA?”
“Why was Pronger’s deal a 35+ deal?”
“What exactly happened with the whole Kovalchuk thing?”
Where you can give answers that are two sentences or so and link to the appropriate section(s) from the rest of your FAQ.
That could work. I’m planning to start throwing examples into the weird sections once I get a little further and have more of the underlying stuff defined, but I want to have most of the dependencies available to be linked up before I do so. The DSOD situation was a whole post, rather than a simple answer.
I do have a some nice pretty spreadsheets like my waiver one, that has every player, their waiver status (and all the relevant data used to determine it), but I haven’t added the new people to that one yet. I have some other similar stuff as well, and some fun flowcharts (some of which haven’t made it to the computer yet). Those could probably be their own posts, but be linked by the sections that explain the topics and choices you see in the image.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 11, 2011 11:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, I’m not entirely sure there will ever be a final chapter… There are 40+ planned chapters, so I feel like as I get questions from people in the regular threads, the answers will just get added to the end. Sort of like appendices.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 11, 2011 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions
The examples section doesn’t have to come last, though that would be most convenient. You could do it early and edit to add the links later as the appropriate sections get written.
Not that I think you need to, just offering options.
Very true. I want the suggestions and opinions, believe me.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 11, 2011 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions
There are 40+ planned chapters
Wow. Maybe I wasn’t joking about you getting some Google $$ out of this. Even doctoral dissertations only have 6 or 7 chapters, max.
At the absolute minimum, Travis ought to be using Web tracking with the SBN honchos to get BSH some cool new graphics or something like TGP just got.
In preparation for NHL free agency, thinking of changing my screen name to Bhudde in 10OC.
I think an example-related FAQ would be better than having examples in the text, because the example will become outdated over time. It’ll matter more when the new CBA takes place, but setting the precedent now is a good idea.
Bob.
I can see how that would be a good idea. I think I’m going to include some for now, to make it easier to get through it, and once we start working on the hub I’ll edit them out so they don’t become irrelevant. I’ll have to scrub back through it to add links and stuff, so I’ll be able to strip out unnecessary examples at that time.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 14, 2011 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions
This is a really good question. I like the links idea a lot, but that depends on how Travis makes these posts permanent. I also like Eric’s idea, but the addendum may be difficult.
I’m a little offended by: “To you guys it might seem like throwing this list of questions together is easy” Because in no way do I think that at all. I know how long you’ve been working on this, how complicated it is to understand it, let alone explain it, let alone compile it into an easily digestible post.
There are at least four stages of brilliance that go into these things, and I’m well aware of that. I’m simply stating that I am someone who needs examples not formulas. In that sense, I’ll know if there are things that need to be explained better if the example is not someone I was thinking of.
That’s all.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jul 12, 2011 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn’t mean to offend you, because I meant it to be more about me and how I’m agonizing over this stuff twice as much as I should. Although it does work out as payback for y’all making fun of me during BSH radio.
If I cant link to the individual question, I can at least link to the right chapter and say “see this question”. We’ll see how it goes.
And I have some examples starting to come up as things get more difficult to understand. Like I have an explanation of what JVR’s QO will need to be next year, when I talk about what the requirements for a QO are in Chapter 3. As I get the fundamental terminology defined, a lot more things will have examples.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jul 12, 2011 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions

by 




















