Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus
When you're talking RFA deals it is certainly entirely within their own control to give or not give these "lockout proof" contracts out, yet they do so anyway. There is little to no way that a team would lose a RFA player over this bonus, it just may take a little longer to complete a deal.
If you're talking UFAs I get that it may become the norm for sure though.
|
Less risky for sure, but there is the possibility that the RFA says "FU trade me" if the team doesn't meet his demands.
Even in the cases where the demands weren't met (Hamonic, Drouin, Yakupov), the players were moved out within a couple of seasons. Granted these guys didn't request a trade for salary reasons with the possible exception of Drouin.
Ryan O'Reilly may be a better example. He was moved on from Colorado after contract negotiations went sour, although its unclear if he requested a trade.
Perhaps an RFA only agrees to sign a short term contract that ends before the lockout season, and then gets that signing bonus in free agency.
Or he signs an offersheet.
When given the choice between standing their ground or potentially souring a relationship with a needed player, I think most teams will just bite the bullet.