McMichael July 25 Arbitration Hearing

[TAFKAP]

Does anyone have any evidence there's any hard feelings between the Blues and McMichael?

Nobody is suggesting there is any existing ill will. The point is that if the two go into a hearing and the Blues lay out all the reasons in detail why he’s not good enough it’s going to be a tough start to the relationship.

I guess I'll just move on. I can't understand this post.

Appreciate the discussions.

I'll close with my view on it and move on. The Blues aren't going to go to the hearing (if it gets that far) and tell McMichael why he's "not good enough."

They are going to go there and say "players X, Y and Z are getting paid A, B and C. Therefore we are willing to pay you this."

Some of you make it sound like the Blues are going to tell him "well, you don't shoot well enough from the left dot, and you're too soft in the third period and you're just not good enough to make 7 million a season."

They're going to compare him to some comparable contracts and that's that.

Not a bad read. The article is just a year old.
https://cba.org/sections/dispute-resolu ... nerdr2025/

That's wild. Especially the stats on players who get traded after arbitration. I couldn't finish it, I got to the point about using mediation instead. Good read, thanks for that.

Agreed. From the article

numerous accounts of arbitrations from players and managers have been shared over the years, and they tend to have an underlying theme of humiliating the players involved.

Just to add to this. If McMichael actually has a hearing, I'm going out on a limb and saying his time here will be short. FWIW, according to Google AI only one Blues player in history has made it to the hearing, Joel Edmundson in 2019. Awarded a one year, $3.1 million contract in July, traded for Faulk in September.

[Frank Barone]

Does anyone have any evidence there's any hard feelings between the Blues and McMichael?

Nobody is suggesting there is any existing ill will. The point is that if the two go into a hearing and the Blues lay out all the reasons in detail why he’s not good enough it’s going to be a tough start to the relationship.

I guess I'll just move on. I can't understand this post.

Appreciate the discussions.

I'll close with my view on it and move on. The Blues aren't going to go to the hearing (if it gets that far) and tell McMichael why he's "not good enough."

They are going to go there and say "players X, Y and Z are getting paid A, B and C. Therefore we are willing to pay you this."

Some of you make it sound like the Blues are going to tell him "well, you don't shoot well enough from the left dot, and you're too soft in the third period and you're just not good enough to make 7 million a season."

They're going to compare him to some comparable contracts and that's that.

Not a bad read. The article is just a year old.
https://cba.org/sections/dispute-resolu ... nerdr2025/

That's wild. Especially the stats on players who get traded after arbitration. I couldn't finish it, I got to the point about using mediation instead. Good read, thanks for that.

Agreed. From the article

numerous accounts of arbitrations from players and managers have been shared over the years, and they tend to have an underlying theme of humiliating the players involved.

Just to add to this. If McMichael actually has a hearing, I'm going out on a limb and saying his time here will be short. FWIW, according to Google AI only one Blues player in history has made it to the hearing, Joel Edmundson in 2019. Awarded a one year, $3.1 million contract in July, traded for Faulk in September.

Just a reminder that McMichael chose arbitration. He knew what he was getting into. That said, they will likely settle before a hearing.

If McMichael is traded in the near term, it will be because the Blues want to keep Holloway, Neighbors and Stenberg at LW for the long term.

[Army's Mom]

Does anyone have any evidence there's any hard feelings between the Blues and McMichael?

Nobody is suggesting there is any existing ill will. The point is that if the two go into a hearing and the Blues lay out all the reasons in detail why he’s not good enough it’s going to be a tough start to the relationship.

I guess I'll just move on. I can't understand this post.

Appreciate the discussions.

I'll close with my view on it and move on. The Blues aren't going to go to the hearing (if it gets that far) and tell McMichael why he's "not good enough."

They are going to go there and say "players X, Y and Z are getting paid A, B and C. Therefore we are willing to pay you this."

Some of you make it sound like the Blues are going to tell him "well, you don't shoot well enough from the left dot, and you're too soft in the third period and you're just not good enough to make 7 million a season."

They're going to compare him to some comparable contracts and that's that.

Not a bad read. The article is just a year old.
https://cba.org/sections/dispute-resolu ... nerdr2025/

That's wild. Especially the stats on players who get traded after arbitration. I couldn't finish it, I got to the point about using mediation instead. Good read, thanks for that.

Agreed. From the article

numerous accounts of arbitrations from players and managers have been shared over the years, and they tend to have an underlying theme of humiliating the players involved.

Just to add to this. If McMichael actually has a hearing, I'm going out on a limb and saying his time here will be short. FWIW, according to Google AI only one Blues player in history has made it to the hearing, Joel Edmundson in 2019. Awarded a one year, $3.1 million contract in July, traded for Faulk in September.

Just a reminder that McMichael chose arbitration. He knew what he was getting into. That said, they will likely settle before a hearing.

If McMichael is traded in the near term, it will be because the Blues want to keep Holloway, Neighbors and Stenberg at LW for the long term.

Roughly 70-80% of arbitration cases are player-initiated, so this is not unusual.

The most famous case of "arbitrations gone wild" is Tommy Salo. In 1997, Salo was the New York Islanders' starting goalie, and he elected to have an arbitration hearing. During this hearing, Mike Milbury challenged Salo’s performance and conditioning so aggressively that Salo was reduced to tears. This is well-documented in multiple sources, and is probably the most extreme case (referenced in the article above also).

[Harry York 37]

Does anyone have any evidence there's any hard feelings between the Blues and McMichael?

Nobody is suggesting there is any existing ill will. The point is that if the two go into a hearing and the Blues lay out all the reasons in detail why he’s not good enough it’s going to be a tough start to the relationship.

I guess I'll just move on. I can't understand this post.

Appreciate the discussions.

I'll close with my view on it and move on. The Blues aren't going to go to the hearing (if it gets that far) and tell McMichael why he's "not good enough."

They are going to go there and say "players X, Y and Z are getting paid A, B and C. Therefore we are willing to pay you this."

Some of you make it sound like the Blues are going to tell him "well, you don't shoot well enough from the left dot, and you're too soft in the third period and you're just not good enough to make 7 million a season."

They're going to compare him to some comparable contracts and that's that.

Not a bad read. The article is just a year old.
https://cba.org/sections/dispute-resolu ... nerdr2025/

That's wild. Especially the stats on players who get traded after arbitration. I couldn't finish it, I got to the point about using mediation instead. Good read, thanks for that.

Agreed. From the article

numerous accounts of arbitrations from players and managers have been shared over the years, and they tend to have an underlying theme of humiliating the players involved.

Just to add to this. If McMichael actually has a hearing, I'm going out on a limb and saying his time here will be short. FWIW, according to Google AI only one Blues player in history has made it to the hearing, Joel Edmundson in 2019. Awarded a one year, $3.1 million contract in July, traded for Faulk in September.

Just a reminder that McMichael chose arbitration. He knew what he was getting into. That said, they will likely settle before a hearing.

If McMichael is traded in the near term, it will be because the Blues want to keep Holloway, Neighbors and Stenberg at LW for the long term.

Roughly 70-80% of arbitration cases are player-initiated, so this is not unusual.

The most famous case of "arbitrations gone wild" is Tommy Salo. In 1997, Salo was the New York Islanders' starting goalie, and he elected to have an arbitration hearing. During this hearing, Mike Milbury challenged Salo’s performance and conditioning so aggressively that Salo was reduced to tears. This is well-documented in multiple sources, and is probably the most extreme case (referenced in the article above also).

From what I, as a fan, have observed there are few bigger (bleeps) in the NHL entire than Milbury.
He was born to be a hatchet-man.

[Army's Mom]

Does anyone have any evidence there's any hard feelings between the Blues and McMichael?

Nobody is suggesting there is any existing ill will. The point is that if the two go into a hearing and the Blues lay out all the reasons in detail why he’s not good enough it’s going to be a tough start to the relationship.

I guess I'll just move on. I can't understand this post.

Appreciate the discussions.

I'll close with my view on it and move on. The Blues aren't going to go to the hearing (if it gets that far) and tell McMichael why he's "not good enough."

They are going to go there and say "players X, Y and Z are getting paid A, B and C. Therefore we are willing to pay you this."

Some of you make it sound like the Blues are going to tell him "well, you don't shoot well enough from the left dot, and you're too soft in the third period and you're just not good enough to make 7 million a season."

They're going to compare him to some comparable contracts and that's that.

Not a bad read. The article is just a year old.
https://cba.org/sections/dispute-resolu ... nerdr2025/

That's wild. Especially the stats on players who get traded after arbitration. I couldn't finish it, I got to the point about using mediation instead. Good read, thanks for that.

Agreed. From the article

numerous accounts of arbitrations from players and managers have been shared over the years, and they tend to have an underlying theme of humiliating the players involved.

Just to add to this. If McMichael actually has a hearing, I'm going out on a limb and saying his time here will be short. FWIW, according to Google AI only one Blues player in history has made it to the hearing, Joel Edmundson in 2019. Awarded a one year, $3.1 million contract in July, traded for Faulk in September.

Just a reminder that McMichael chose arbitration. He knew what he was getting into. That said, they will likely settle before a hearing.

If McMichael is traded in the near term, it will be because the Blues want to keep Holloway, Neighbors and Stenberg at LW for the long term.

Roughly 70-80% of arbitration cases are player-initiated, so this is not unusual.

The most famous case of "arbitrations gone wild" is Tommy Salo. In 1997, Salo was the New York Islanders' starting goalie, and he elected to have an arbitration hearing. During this hearing, Mike Milbury challenged Salo’s performance and conditioning so aggressively that Salo was reduced to tears. This is well-documented in multiple sources, and is probably the most extreme case (referenced in the article above also).

From what I, as a fan, have observed there are few bigger (bleeps) in the NHL entire than Milbury.
He was born to be a hatchet-man.

Stan Bowman may yet challenge for the crown, but i agree. They might still be paying off Yashin...

[blues2112]

Stan Bowman may yet challenge for the crown, but i agree. They might still be paying off Yashin...

Rick DiPietro gets a $1.5 million Islanders check every July 1 through 2028-29 season. The guy is 44, hasn't played since 1221.

That ain't bad!

Who was the Islanders owner?

[Army's Mom]

Stan Bowman may yet challenge for the crown, but i agree. They might still be paying off Yashin...

Rick DiPietro gets a $1.5 million Islanders check every July 1 through 2028-29 season. The guy is 44, hasn't played since 1221.

That ain't bad!

Who was the Islanders owner?

Charles Wang?

[blues2112]

Stan Bowman may yet challenge for the crown, but i agree. They might still be paying off Yashin...

Rick DiPietro gets a $1.5 million Islanders check every July 1 through 2028-29 season. The guy is 44, hasn't played since 1221.

That ain't bad!

Who was the Islanders owner?

Charles Wang?

That's him!

[TBone]

Stan Bowman may yet challenge for the crown, but i agree. They might still be paying off Yashin...

Rick DiPietro gets a $1.5 million Islanders check every July 1 through 2028-29 season. The guy is 44, hasn't played since 1221.

That ain't bad!

Who was the Islanders owner?

Charles Wang?

That's him!

No offense!

Disclaimer: The video above is hosted on Youtube, and has not be reviewed by the staff of the Post-Dispatch.

[Old_Goat]

Stan Bowman may yet challenge for the crown, but i agree. They might still be paying off Yashin...

Rick DiPietro gets a $1.5 million Islanders check every July 1 through 2028-29 season. The guy is 44, hasn't played since 1221.

That ain't bad!

Who was the Islanders owner?

Charles Wang?

That's him!

No offense!

Disclaimer: The video above is hosted on Youtube, and has not be reviewed by the staff of the Post-Dispatch.

HaHaHa!!

However it goes, I'm sure that McMichael will get over it. It's a business and this is part of the game.

[TheJackBurton]

our long national nightmare is officially over.

[b-a-a-a-rclay]

"I've known a great many troubles in my life. And most of them have never happened." Mark Twain (the quote is close enough)

As I was saying.

[blues2112]

our long national nightmare is officially over.

What's the next Blues Talk panic, and how much will be irrationality based on a "link" or "insider" or "X team's fans say ..."?

[kimzey59]

our long national nightmare is officially over.

What's the next Blues Talk panic, and how much will be irrationality based on a "link" or "insider" or "X team's fans say ..."?

The next panic will actually be a legitimate one: The return of Kerber and Vitale.

[blues2112]

our long national nightmare is officially over.

What's the next Blues Talk panic, and how much will be irrationality based on a "link" or "insider" or "X team's fans say ..."?

The next panic will actually be a legitimate one: The return of Kerber and Vitale.

Well played.

In truth, I'm apparently one of the minority who likes and appreciates what they do. So it goes.

[kimzey59]

our long national nightmare is officially over.

What's the next Blues Talk panic, and how much will be irrationality based on a "link" or "insider" or "X team's fans say ..."?

The next panic will actually be a legitimate one: The return of Kerber and Vitale.

Well played.

In truth, I'm apparently one of the minority who likes and appreciates what they do. So it goes.

Kerber I can tolerate when he’s actually focused on the game.

Vitale is just a dumpster fire. Can’t stay on topic, doesn’t follow the play and constantly has to inject his personal life into everything. I would actually prefer Rivers to Vitale even if Rivers has the personality of a broken stick.