Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
You really need to stop being so fascinated by NMCs. Almost no one is actually prevented from being traded by an NMC. They might veto certain destinations, but if you want to strip the team down, they are a non-factor. And in circumstances where the team they're leaving is literally the worst in the NHL, the number of acceptable alternative destinations - particularly for veteran players who already have their deal in place and just want to play meaningful winning hockey - is inevitably going to be pretty broad.
The bigger hurdle to trading them is going to be ownership, if they go on a bit of a mini run, and he's convinced "hey maybe we still have a shot at a wild card", or "our problems are solved, we're playoff bound next season for sure". That isn't even unlikely.
|
I literally said they could well waive the NMC. But quit acting like they are a non factor, when we know players from this team who've relied on them. They are more likely to veto destinations than outright stop a trade, but that means a worse return, just like when Hanifin limited his destinations.
And we aren't talking one Canuck. Every single player they'd want to trade has one. And it's not like they'd be waiving for a playoff run or two. They'd be waiving to commit to a new team for 6 or 7 years, because they just signed their contracts in the last couple years. So they will have more concerns than short term success. They will want places where they want to live for quite a while.