During last night's game, Kelly Hrudey's opinion was brought up. His take: A team should never approach a player to ask him to waive something that's in the contract and has been negotiated.
I see where he's coming from, but I don't entirely agree. There are many situations where a trade could benefit both the team and the player. I was curious where do you guys stand on the issue?
I think a better approach would be to have a monetary compensation attached to breaking a NTC/NMC. For example, both the team and the player agree that if a player agrees to waive the NTC, and gets traded, then he gets compensated with $1M(insert dollar value here). The same idea could apply when a player asks for a trade.
Would/Should that affect the cap? I think such compensation can be treated like an entry level performance bonus.
Quote:
While performance bonuses count against the salary cap, teams are permitted to exceed the salary cap due to performance bonuses, to a maximum of 7.5% of the Salary Cap.
If a team exceeds the Salary Cap due to performance bonuses, then any amount over the Salary Cap is considered a Bonus Carryover, and counts against the cap in the next season.
|
So what do you think, is it something that should be a part of the NHL's Standard Player's Contract(SPC)?