CFL doesn’t have guaranteed contracts. I’m thinking football players put their health on the line more than hockey players do. Having played both sports.
I’ve played both sports as well and I completely disagree with you. Even if one were to argue football is a more physically taxing sport the total number of games played, travel, etc makes being a professional hockey player far more demanding.
Hrudeys out of touch on his thoughts. I understand the sentiment, but it's business. Players just want the control of where they end up, look at Kadri, he used his NTC properly and won a cup in Colorado, guess where he is now? The team he used his NTC on.
__________________ "Everybody's so desperate to look smart that nobody is having fun anymore" -Jackie Redmond
I’ve played both sports as well and I completely disagree with you. Even if one were to argue football is a more physically taxing sport the total number of games played, travel, etc makes being a professional hockey player far more demanding.
Hrudeys out of touch on his thoughts. I understand the sentiment, but it's business. Players just want the control of where they end up, look at Kadri, he used his NTC properly and won a cup in Colorado, guess where he is now? The team he used his NTC on.
Yup, and I'm sure when the right cup contender comes knocking on Flames door, Markstrom will be down with it. Just a matter of what the other team offers in return.
We are. Total number of games and travel/fatigue are major factors to consider
Guess we don’t agree.
But I guess if players don’t want to be approached about waiving, they probably shouldn’t ask for trades. Seems like the same thing. By that I mean not honoring a negotiated deal.
Who said players don't want to be approached? They can be approached. They can say no. Torey Krug said no to a trade and he's still in St Louis and there doesn't appear to be any bad blood.
The Following User Says Thank You to Ped For This Useful Post:
Who said players don't want to be approached? They can be approached. They can say no. Torey Krug said no to a trade and he's still in St Louis and there doesn't appear to be any bad blood.
But I guess if players don’t want to be approached about waiving, they probably shouldn’t ask for trades. Seems like the same thing. By that I mean not honoring a negotiated deal.
Neither of a player asking for a trade or a team asking a player if they are willing to waive violations of a NTC.
The league should ban all NTC, NMC, limited trade list, etc.
How in the world can a player with NMC asks to be traded out from his current team, but then can pick and choose which team he wants to go to, limiting trade options or lowering returns, ala Iginla. That's utter BS....
Also, trades with salary retention or trading for players in LTIR for hiding salaries and making cap space is another thing that should be banned.
The Following User Says Thank You to lazypucker For This Useful Post:
How in the world can a player with NMC asks to be traded out from his current team, but then can pick and choose which team he wants to go to, limiting trade options or lowering returns, ala Iginla. That's utter BS....
They can do it because the GM who negotiated that NMC or NTC didn’t demand a clause that states if the player requests a trade then their NMC/NTC is null and void.
I don’t think that there’s anything in the CBA that would prevent a GM from negotiating such a clause.
None of those things can be done by the nhl without the pa agreeing to it
Therein lies the problem
I honestly don’t think the league is interested in eliminating these clauses because GMs use them to negotiate lower salaries in exchange for the security of a NTC/NMC.
I honestly don’t think the league is interested in eliminating these clauses because GMs use them to negotiate lower salaries in exchange for the security of a NTC/NMC.
I don't think that is the case anymore, at least most of the time. They have become expected by the player and everyone hands them out. I doubt there are too many cases these days where an NMC holds up a contract from being signed, because they are just the standard now.
If there was actually a limit on the amount a team could have, they would have some actual value.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 01-14-2024 at 10:29 PM.
They can do it because the GM who negotiated that NMC or NTC didn’t demand a clause that states if the player requests a trade then their NMC/NTC is null and void.
I don’t think that there’s anything in the CBA that would prevent a GM from negotiating such a clause.
I wouldn't be sure about that. The CBA is very specific about what clauses can and cannot be in a standard player agreement.
In any case, the GM who demanded such a clause would find the player refusing to sign and walking to free agency.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
I don’t think that there’s anything in the CBA that would prevent a GM from negotiating such a clause.
There is. The NTC/NMC always follows the player after a trade.
There used to be a rule that allowed the acquiring team to void the NTC/NMC if it hadn't yet taken effect, but most teams still chose to honour them because they didn't want to piss off a newly acquired player.
When Subban was traded to Nashville, the Preds decided to not honour the NMC that was supposed to start 2 days after the trade. The PA didn't like this, so it was changed in the last update to the CBA. It also changed it so any new NMC/NTCs on a contract can be retroactively applied to the player's current contract so long as he is eligible to receive one (this happened with Backlund's new contract).
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
They can do it because the GM who negotiated that NMC or NTC didn’t demand a clause that states if the player requests a trade then their NMC/NTC is null and void.
I don’t think that there’s anything in the CBA that would prevent a GM from negotiating such a clause.
Even if such a clause existed, a player could get around it by simply saying “ I’m not demanding a trade, but I wouldn’t be against it either, as long as I was happy with the destination”.
Remember, a player can request a trade, the team can choose to ignore that request.
Sorry, re-reading that, I see I was responding to the wrong idea. I was talking about the NTC/NMC being voided after the player is traded, but iggy_oi meant voiding it before the trade once a request has been made.
I suppose a GM could request that as one of the conditions of a modified NTC, but I doubt any player would agree to it. Also, as mentioned, the player would just not officially request a trade, but indicate that he'd be willing to accept one in the right situation.
For example, I don't know if Hamilton ever officially requested a trade, but his actions at the end of his last season here made it clear to everyone that his time remaining with the team was likely at its end after he skipped the end of year media scrum and I believe also didn't do the exit interview with management.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
