Click to enlargeBy now, hopefully you’ve read Larry Brooks’ item on Sean Avery’s arbitration battle. It reveals the nature of the process, where the team tries to devalue a player they desire to retain for less money than the player would like to receive.
In the Rangers’ brief to be presented to the arbitration panel today in Toronto, the club dubbed Avery a “detriment” to the team. I don’t want to rehash everything Brooks has already ably depicted, but for the sake of creating a dialogue here, it’s asinine and incredible for Avery to be dubbed a detriment, even with the reasons given by the Blueshirts. When with the Kings, Avery was the most penalized player in the league. Dumping Jason Ward seemed like the main priority in the trade that brought Avery to the Rangers, but his performance down the stretch was possibly the most pleasant surprise of the season. It’s difficult to argue against the positive impact his arrival had on the team, and it’s absurd to label detrimental a player so pivotal in the Rangers’ quest to make the post-season.
Cap issues aside, and perhaps logic as well, Avery clearly deserves towards the higher end of what is available to him through arbitration … if only because of the blatant transparency of Sather’s scheme to devalue him. While Avery, objectively, is not yet worth the $2.6M he is seeking, Brooks is right to call the Rangers’ desired award of $1.3M “laughably low.”
Avery was candid in his reaction to the brief and — while one might expect such negative language as Slat’s would sour a player on the team — he still asserts his desire to be a Ranger. And he will be, for at least one more season at the end of which he becomes an unrestricted free agent.
The Rangers may see this coming campaign as a chance for Avery to prove he is not “detrimental” to the team, and that he is worth the kind of award he’s currently seeking. However, it’s hard to ignore the potentially poisonous atmosphere Sather’s brief could create.