Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatle17
It doesn't offend me. But to have a story about a guy asking for a trade and then listing where he will go is a bitch move (see Marty St. Louis). He signed a contract with a clause given, or negotiated for, because he wanted to stay in Ottawa. By this clause being in place the team is handcuffed when, or if, the player becomes underperforming or injury prone (see Spezza, Jason). Then when the player decides he doesn't like the pressure/what he is paid/his role etc., he demands a trade "but only to the teams I want to go to". So it's not an even playing field between team and player. If the NMC was negotiated in good faith then it should be honored in good faith, by both parties.
If one of the parties decides to alter the contract then they should be willing to remove one of the sticky points of the contract. If the player requests a trade then he should waive his NMC and if the team asks him to waive the clause then they should be limited by the player into where he will go. Spezza demands a trade but under his terms so he screws over the team that has made him rich over his career (see Jarome Iginla) by limiting where he will move.
Clearer for you.
|
I wonder if this is something teams can start asking for in the future.
But a team could simply deny their trade request completely unless they waive their NMC for additional teams. Really, if the player wants out then the team actually has a lot of potential leverage there.