clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Question of the Day: Why Did Bettman Choose The Lightning's 4th Round Pick?

Eagle Eye Burke sees all of the loopholes in the CBA (Photo Credit: Kerry, not <strong>that</strong> Kerry Fraser)
Eagle Eye Burke sees all of the loopholes in the CBA (Photo Credit: Kerry, not that Kerry Fraser)

A little late today thanks to a late April Fools prank (totally legal) but here's the gist of it:

The Leafs' just lost a 4th round pick that they picked up in a completely legal deal with the Lightning. The league and some commenters did not like the optics of the deal but it was all within the letter of the law. Speaking of within the letter of the law, Jonas Frogren's deal was considered legal for about 90% of the season until yesterday when Bettman suddenly revived a dead issue.

Update: I added this to the earlier piece but here is something worth reading from Tim Wharnsby

The Toronto Maple Leafs and the National Hockey League Players' Association got their way over the NHL in the matter over 28-year-old rookie defenceman Jonas Frogren.

The league wanted the Leafs to sign Frogren to an entry-level deal. But the NHLPA and the Leafs contended that he should not be subjected to the restrictions of an entry-level pact.

Prior to a hearing on Thursday the two sides settled and agreed that Frogren would continue playing under the two-year, $2.13-million (all currency U.S.) deal he signed in the summer. The Swede's contract includes a $755,000 signing bonus and salaries of $475,000 this season and $900,000 in 2009-10.

The move stinks for more than because it just went against the Leafs. Of course, some opposition fans think it was justice being served. Others are just as bemused as we are about the lack of transparency.

Keeping in mind that the Leafs' don't have their own fourth round pick (Thanks JFJ!) why would Bettman decide that it had to be an acquired pick that was forfeited?