Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen
There's nothing in the contract that protects the player from an expansion draft. Period. Okay, it's not sooo black and white so as long as the NHL and NHLPA agreed, that would be what the ruling was.
Again, A no-movement contract "prevents the involuntary relocation of a Player, whether by Trade, Loan or Waiver claim." As defined in the CBA. There's nothing about expansion drafts.
If the NHL and NHLPA agree that NMC must be protected (for free or at the cost of a spot, or whatever the case may be), they could also define which NMC need to be protected. Full NMC for the duration of the contracts, NMC at the time of the expansion, NMC for the following year. etc.
The idea that Wideman would need to be protected because of his NMC on an expiring contract is asinine, illogical, and does not have a legal basis.
|
log·ic
ˈläjik/Submit
noun
1.
reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
Upholding a valid contract meets the definition of logic. So continue spewing whatever you want, you still will not be right.