View Single Post
07-07-2008, 11:28 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 9,285
vCash: 500
I think it's interesting they decided to actually specify (somewhat vaguely) this rule, instead of letting it fall into general "no circumvention" clause of the CBA. I guess it would be difficult to prove any gentleman's agreement on retirement, but likewise it could be hard to prove other stuff that might fall under the no circumvention clause.

I actually like the wording, because it allows for the "handshake" contract, where by a player can sign with a team and "retire as a Canadien" or some other team. It's my understanding that a player who signed a one-year deal and immediately retired wouldn't subject the team to a cap hit.

For instance, if Sundin does decide to go play somewhere else for the next season or two, he'd be able to "retire as a Maple Leaf", even if only ceremonially.

Is my interpretation incorrect?

coolguy21415 is offline   Reply With Quote