Quote:
Originally Posted by lazypucker
If a player doesn't want to play for your team, there is nothing you can do really, contract or rule changes or not. Look at Eric Lindros and the Nordiques...
|
I think if an NHL-ready, 18-year old, generational talent was drafted out of university and pulled the same stunt, the team that drafted him would have the same option to trade the asset and still get a massive return like the Nordiques did. This is more relevant to players that are not NHL-ready and aren't risking much by holding out.
Not too many phenoms go the university route because they know they are going pro right after being drafted. For late-blooming, diamond-in-the-rough types, by the time they are NHL ready, many are close to free-agency. Teams can't sign them sooner to hedge their bets the way they can with junior players. I mean, they technically can, but then they have to worry about where to play them if they aren't developed enough for professional leagues. You risk upsetting their development, or you risk losing them. Neither option is beneficial to the team, while one of the options is often beneficial to the player.
A little OT, but on the Lindros thing, he warned the Nordiques even before he was drafted that he wouldn't play for them, so they lost no asset value. Two years of rights was worth a lot to them as an asset even if he would never play for them. There is also a good chance if he re-entered, that Quebec would be the team drafting him again. Teams that wanted him weren't going to wait 4 years until he became a free agent, and have him drafted by another team in between. More than the few months of rights by the time the university "loophole" becomes an apparent issue for most teams. Teams that are interested are not going to give up much in return because waiting it out in not a big deal.
(Not technically a loophole, I know)