I always thought it was the chance of something happening. E5 being done deal, E4 being with high degree of certainty, etc.?
supposedly its some combination of reliable sources and the number of people telling him. Like if he hears offhand from one guy who isn't really that connected to the organization it's an e1 and if multiple connected people tell him its an e4 or something like that. however it really seems like e5 means done deal and everything else is kinda arbitrary.
The series of moves that lead up to this and this itself are mistakes. He deserved more loyalty than that...and all the people who are okay with this are hopefully not the same people who scoff when players go for the most money they can get. It's a business, and when that trumps other things, it really sucks.
I have no problem showing a player loyalty, but when it comes down to it, you gotta do what's best for the team. We have no idea what is coming back (if anything, if there even is a trade). If it is Gagne for peanuts just to clear space for some chump. Then it is a bad trade. If it is for a decent player with a smaller cap hit with room for a goalie, how can you complain? Yeah he is the longest tenured Flyer on the team, but if another team wants him and will give us a better chance to win, you gotta throw loyalty out the door. If it was all about loyalty Leighton would have gotten a lifetime contract for saving the season last year. Same with Boucher. I am interested in seeing what happens with this Gagne deal. Usually when Eklund moves it to an e4 it winds up going down. Hopefully the pooch is not screwed.
To prevent teams from moving you at a time when it's very bad for you, or to a location you really don't want to play in. It gives you some control over your fate.
So then he didn't really mean: In the past he said he'd waive it. He said if your asking him to wIve that means you don't want him anymore and he doesn't want to play for a team that doesn't want him.
"An NHL source has informed me the Flyers have asked Simon Gagne to waive his NTC."
- Eklund
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. It won't happen because it's Eklund, right?
Say no Gags, don't feel obligated to leave here because Homer screwed up so much in the last 24-48 hours. I'm wearing my Gagne jersey the rest of the day to ward off this nonsense.
Also, NTCs are dumb. It's more insulting to be asked to waive them then it is to just get traded I think. How does Gagne feel the rest of the year if this is true and he does say "no."
So then he didn't really mean: In the past he said he'd waive it. He said if your asking him to wIve that means you don't want him anymore and he doesn't want to play for a team that doesn't want him.
That's what I'm saying. If you go on record as saying you'll waive it if the team asks because you don't want to play for a team that doesn't want you, why even have it in the first place because you'll waive it at the first request. Might as well just not even have it. Save yourself the trouble of worrying about a where you might be playing next year.
I have no problem showing a player loyalty, but when it comes down to it, you gotta do what's best for the team. We have no idea what is coming back (if anything, if there even is a trade). If it is Gagne for peanuts just to clear space for some chump. Then it is a bad trade. If it is for a decent player with a smaller cap hit with room for a goalie, how can you complain? Yeah he is the longest tenured Flyer on the team, but if another team wants him and will give us a better chance to win, you gotta throw loyalty out the door. If it was all about loyalty Leighton would have gotten a lifetime contract for saving the season last year. Same with Boucher. I am interested in seeing what happens with this Gagne deal. Usually when Eklund moves it to an e4 it winds up going down. Hopefully the pooch is not screwed.
Leighton played like a decent back-up goalie and we loved him for it, because we didn't even expect that much. That is owed an entirely different level of loyalty than your longest tenured player and career Flyer. Moving a guy like Simon because you need cap space, when you traded for an expensive defenseman that you don't need the day prior . . . that is pretty telling of how much you value that player being on your team. Gagne deserved better than to be a salary dump so we can pay our fifth defense man making 4 million a year.
But, it's a business, it just sucks when it comes down to strictly business decisions is all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles
So then he didn't really mean: In the past he said he'd waive it. He said if your asking him to waive that means you don't want him anymore and he doesn't want to play for a team that doesn't want him.
I'm just answering a general question on the purpose of an NTC. Nobody wants to be where they aren't wanted, but an NTC gives you some control over your destiny. I can't speak to what Simon meant when he said something. If we are thinking of the same interview he was basically speaking to NTC's in general not his won situation, and was saying that if a team wants you gone, life can become pretty uncomfortable and not waiving is worse than taking the trade.
The series of moves that lead up to this and this itself are mistakes. He deserved more loyalty than that...and all the people who are okay with this are hopefully not the same people who scoff when players go for the most money they can get. It's a business, and when that trumps other things, it really sucks.
