|2011 - Kaspars Daugavins||65||5||6||11||-2||12||0||0||1||77|
As you likely recall, Daugavins stepped into Ottawa's lineup early last season and became a solid penalty-killer and spark-plug player on the team. Come playoff time, though, he only played one game for the team, bumped out by the solid play of Zenon Konopka in the post-season.
We haven't yet explored what Daugavins' value would be as an RFA, but he'd probably compare with similar players as Jim O'Brien--for whom we did publish an RFA dossier. The difference with Daugavins, though, is that he's heading to arbitration. Apparently the sticking point is that Daugavins wants a one-way deal.
I'm not CBA expert, but after a brief Google search, I was able to find a pretty good rundown of what comes with arbitration on The Hosers blog. Here are the broad strokes:
- The team selects whether they want a one- or two-year settlement
- Both sides present comparable cases to the player in question
- The arbitrator makes a decision based on comparable cases, which could include a "minor-league clause" (I'm assuming this takes the form of a two-way deal)
- If the salary awarded in the arbitrator's decision is above a certain figure--which in 2005 was $1,042,173 but now may be as high as $1,753,000--the team has the option of walking away from the deal, rendering the player a UFA; if it's below, the team must adhere to the deal
That's how I understand it, anyway. The Senators tendered a qualifying offer to Daugavins, which meant they retained his rights whether or not an agreement was struck; with arbitration, though, there's a wrench in those plans. Given the number of one-way contracts and budding prospects around, the question at hand is whether or not there's room for Daugavins in the Sens' lineup at present.