Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonded
Having a ballpark of where Andersson will sign and actually being involved in the negotiations are a completely different thing. The other GM also wouldn’t love to have Conroy involved as he could then use that as leverage to send Andersson to another team. There is also issues with NTCs and signing bonuses etc.
The issue with the Hanifin trade seems to be that there was no firm framework in place for for a trade return. This way is simpler, align on the trade return and then see if there is a contract fit.
|
The punchline of the sign & trade is risk management. If the receiving team wants to eliminate risk then having Conroy put an extension in place before the trade is done is how they do that (and how he extracts extra value).
If Conroy is talking to 6 or 8 different teams then he already has leverage in the bidding war (and Andersson has leverage too). At no point do I think Conroy opens up exclusive negotiating rights between Andersson and another GM where Conroy is not involved (and not playing one team off of another).
If the GM wants that exclusive negotiation with no Conroy involvement then they can trade for Andersson first and then work out the extension with him and take on the risk that he might not sign their offer.
It is definitely an interesting thought exercise. I hope once the dust settles we get to find out how these things played out (but expect that we likely never will).