First off, I'm told by a reliable source that the NHLPA is taking a hands-off approach to individual arbitration hearings, and it is the Agent's job to make the player's case. This is the right thing for them to do given the conflict of interest they have, but it nevertheless must be an uncomfortable (and tacit, one presumes) admission that they really can't take a keen interest in the compensation of their individual members.

Second, in that previous post on Arbitration, I was working under the assumption that it is now Final Offer Arbitration, where the Club and the Player both submit a proposed salary, and the Arbitrator is bound to select one number or the other (Tyler says the same thing here). However, upon closer reading of the CBA (Article 12) and the various news stories on the action so far, I'm no longer sure that that's the case. There's no language to that effect (that I can find) in the CBA, and the stories on (for example) Briere and York aren't specific on whether those players Won or Lost, nor on the salaries requested by either party.

Anyway, I still have some confusion on that issue; apologies if I added to yours. (And if you know of a link where this is explained in black & white, please drop it in the comments).

And lastly, NHL watchers are having a laff (and rightly so) that it was Mike Milbury standing up for the Isles at Mike York's arbitration hearing. Larry Brooks was one of them, but something else in his piece struck me as even more ridiculous:

It's true, Milbury remained mute throughout the session at which hired-gun attorney Larry Bertuzzi argued for management that York should take a $1.05M pay cut from the $2.05M he earned last season while finishing fourth on the team in scoring (13-39-52, minus-9), but still, where was anyone from the crack Board of Directors and what does this say about the fired GM's ongoing influence with the owner and what does this tell us about the owner's judgment?

Emphasis mine: the Islanders' submitted a proposed salary for Mike York of $1M? What? Huh? This can't be true, can it?

If I was inclined to defend Charles Wang re: the events of last week, I would have roughly said that there are no Definites in pro sports; just because no one has successfully run a team like that before doesn't mean that it's impossible and/or doomed to failure (i.e. New always looks Stupid); and that Garth Snow may end up being better than a whole lot of NHL GMs, in spite of his lack of experience. But a submission of $1M for Mike York's salary at arbitration is hard evidence of pure incompetence. They might as well not have shown up, for all the credibility they must have had in front of the Arbitrator.