HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Mike Brophy: Get rid of NTC/NMC

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-17-2012, 05:25 PM
  #26
spuzzum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 58
vCash: 500
I liked it in the old days with NTCs where a GM could threaten his player to play better or be traded to Winnipeg, Quebec City or Hartford. I think it helps keeping the player honest after they sign the big deal.

spuzzum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 05:34 PM
  #27
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOML View Post
Why is it okay to applaud a team for landing a bigtime free agent or keeping their star player around with a now-typical ntc and at the same time jeer a player for actually using the ntc?
Because he is demanding out of the organization he committed too, and using the NTC to assure a very preferrable destination. This could set a dangerous precedent. I'm sure most players prefer being on contending teams. Its not really much of a reach.

TSA0402 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 05:39 PM
  #28
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,426
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kratzbuerste View Post
Meh, I see where you are coming from in this particular situation, because Nash is the one who wants the trade, but in general I think it is fine the way it is. Getting to decide which teams they'll waive for, in the case of Luongo for example.
I think they should be able to pick 10-15 places they will not go to. That way, a market can still be created and the team can get some value for them. If these guys want a shot at the Stanley Cup, 16 teams get a chance every spring.

I know I am incredibly biased, but I don't like how a player can screw a team with his NTC.

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 05:39 PM
  #29
iPunch
Leafs Fan
 
iPunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,469
vCash: 133
They can keep NMC/NTC as long as they put a max duration on it. I think max 5 years is pretty reasonable.

iPunch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 05:40 PM
  #30
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumrokh View Post
Were there rules for the nature of no-trade/no-movement clauses in the last CBA?
The NTC rules of the old CBA were effectively the same as the current ones - NTCs were permitted in the years after a player was UFA eligible (32 yo / 31 yo).

NMCs were not permitted under the old CBA - they were added new in the current one.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 05:44 PM
  #31
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,409
vCash: 500
Get rid of Mike Brophy. Stupid idea. NMC I wouldn't mind seeing gone tho.

nhlfan9191 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:00 PM
  #32
rumrokh
I Bleed Blue
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The NTC rules of the old CBA were effectively the same as the current ones - NTCs were permitted in the years after a player was UFA eligible (32 yo / 31 yo).

NMCs were not permitted under the old CBA - they were added new in the current one.
I meant the "current" one that's expiring, not the one before that.

What I wanted to establish was whether or not there were other rules preventing NTC's from including exceptions such as, "If the player requests a trade, his NTC is void," or something a bit less absolute, such as, "If the player requests a trade, he must submit a list of 15 teams outside of the division to which he'd accept a trade." There are a bunch of "submit a short list by x date" style clauses, but it seems like there have been none so far that prevent a player with a NTC from requesting a trade while retaining significant control.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:01 PM
  #33
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I know I am incredibly biased, but I don't like how a player can screw a team with his NTC.
Technically though, the team is well within their rights to keep the player if they feel he is being unreasonable in his demands.

TSA0402 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:05 PM
  #34
Furious George
Ville the Villain
 
Furious George's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Shark Infested Water
Country: United States
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Players should start offering or GMs start requesting No-trade-demand clauses.

Furious George is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:10 PM
  #35
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,166
vCash: 2283
You got a problem with the clauses, write them out better and negotiate better. You don't mind signing them to that sweetheart cap deal when you have to hand them out yet you want to cry when you give players that tool and they use it. The people upset with the clause in the hockey world, the GM's and such, just have sour grapes about it.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:10 PM
  #36
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,265
vCash: 500
Only rule I would change is a team has the right to put players on waivers if they want to get rid of the contract(although NMC means they can't be sent to the minors)

boredmale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:10 PM
  #37
TorstenFrings
wieder zuhause!!!
 
TorstenFrings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I think they should be able to pick 10-15 places they will not go to. That way, a market can still be created and the team can get some value for them. If these guys want a shot at the Stanley Cup, 16 teams get a chance every spring.

I know I am incredibly biased, but I don't like how a player can screw a team with his NTC.
Sure, I like the idea of the NTC being voyded by a trade request. Do it with official written request forms submitted like in the Premier League in soccer and once a player signs one, he surrenders his NTC. I just think when the team is the one wanting the trade, it is should still be the players right to agree to Florida but not Edmonton.

TorstenFrings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:12 PM
  #38
HockeyH3aven
#Flynnsanity
 
HockeyH3aven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,201
vCash: 500
Yeah, I have a problem with players who sign contracts with NTC's and then later ask to be traded, only to use their NTC clause to try restrict possible trade partners and hand cuff the organization ala Rick Nash.

Also, to the people stating "nobody says you have to offer them a NTC", you're pretty damn wrong. They're so commonplace nowadays that if you want to sign a big FA or even keep your own players, a NTC is basically a formality at this point.

HockeyH3aven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 06:55 PM
  #39
Sureves
Registered User
 
Sureves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 7,083
vCash: 500
If you demand a trade your NTC should be voided - bottom line.

But you need NTCs. Not only is it unrealistic to assume that this would ever happen, but even if it DID happen, this would result in players only signing 1-2 year deals (for a lot more money per year mind you) because they'd be afraid of getting traded to a team they didn't want to play for.

That's the complete opposite of what I want the NHL to be - I want players playing with the same team for large portions of their careers, I don't want a bunch of mercenaries.

Sureves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:00 PM
  #40
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,837
vCash: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
I'd be in favour of abolishing no movement clauses, but keeping no trade clauses.
I agree with this but I would like the NTC/NMC to be retroactive as a Flames fan

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:02 PM
  #41
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,498
vCash: 500
Convert all existing NMCs into NTCs and we're going one step towards the right direction.

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:20 PM
  #42
Sawyer
Wheeeee
 
Sawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,114
vCash: 500
I'd love the owners to do away with the guaranteed contracts like the NFL
Although it gives an out to bad GM's and doesn't serve as lesson learned...nothing seems to teach lessons anyways each UFA period

Sawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:20 PM
  #43
CTU2fan
Registered User
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyH3aven View Post
Yeah, I have a problem with players who sign contracts with NTC's and then later ask to be traded, only to use their NTC clause to try restrict possible trade partners and hand cuff the organization ala Rick Nash.

Also, to the people stating "nobody says you have to offer them a NTC", you're pretty damn wrong. They're so commonplace nowadays that if you want to sign a big FA or even keep your own players, a NTC is basically a formality at this point.
Not necessarily. There's a trade off; GM's offer NTC/NMC and in return they get their guy to give a little on his salary demands. If you don't want to offer the NTC then be prepared to overpay compared to the club that does.

I get that this is kind of an issue now because of Nash, but how many players outside of Nash have done this? And frankly, the way that team's been managed you can hardly blame a guy for wanting out and not wanting to end up in a similar situation again. That's no offense to any Jackets fans; as an old Whalers fan I can surely sympathize with fans enduring piss-poor management and players (Shanahan, Coffey) begging out because of it. But banning NTC/NMC isn't the answer. One or 2 guys aren't a reason to change the rules.

CTU2fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:23 PM
  #44
CTU2fan
Registered User
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawyer View Post
I'd love the owners to do away with the guaranteed contracts like the NFL
Although it gives an out to bad GM's and doesn't serve as lesson learned...nothing seems to teach lessons anyways each UFA period
Never ever happen. Especially not with Don Fehr heading the PA. The only reason you see that in the NFL is because the NFLPA is the biggest joke in union history. It's utterly ridiculous that the sport with the most risk of injury subjects its talent to non-guaranteed contracts. And that's also true for hockey; too much risk to ask players to work like that.

CTU2fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:28 PM
  #45
danishh
Dat Stache
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: mtl/ott/somewhere
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,654
vCash: 50
I believe that an NTC/NMC should be viewed as a commitment from both sides, and both sides should be contractually obligated to honour it. Trade talks about a player with an NTC/NMC should be considered illegal under the CBA.

If a player wants to be moved, or if a team wants to move the player, the NTC/NMC can be dissolved, only with the agreement of both parties. Only at that point can the player be shopped.

__________________
RIP Kev.
danishh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:30 PM
  #46
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rpro View Post
I have no problem with ntc/nmc but they should be void if the player requests a trade.
Bingo!

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:34 PM
  #47
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
General Managers trade off perks such as NTCs/NMCs in exchange for reduced dollars on the contracts. Players want them because they, quite rightly, feel that if they are going to commit a considerable number of years to being with a team, they should have some degree of certainty they will actually stay there. Also, no one is forcing GMs to give them out, they do so of their own volitions.

Would you prefer if all players were signing 1-2 year deals, and either going for the top dollar or ring chasing every time they reached free agency again? Somehow, I suspect you and many other fans would call them mercenaries and decry them for their lack of "loyalty".



Forcing teams to honor the contracts they agree to is "holding them hostage"?

Far too many fans and media types seem to believe players are nothing more than chattel for their teams.
Hmm, players don't have to perform at the level they've been paid. Maybe they'd like to lose guaranteed contracts?

supahdupah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:40 PM
  #48
Sawyer
Wheeeee
 
Sawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTU2fan View Post
Never ever happen. Especially not with Don Fehr heading the PA. The only reason you see that in the NFL is because the NFLPA is the biggest joke in union history. It's utterly ridiculous that the sport with the most risk of injury subjects its talent to non-guaranteed contracts. And that's also true for hockey; too much risk to ask players to work like that.
Actually, it's not because of the union. Although they did agree to it, they also recognize the inherent risk in guaranteed contracts vs player performance and development within the NFL.
But that's not the only aspect within non guaranteed contracts, an NFL team fields a much larger squad than any of the other major pro sports in north america, they also have a varying contract style that is not implemented in the same way that it is in the NHL. They have tagging which is a different aspect as well.
The league itself was able to convince the PA that non guaranteed contracts was in the best interest for the health of the league economy, hence the advent of huge signing bonuses that were paid out after signing.

Non guaranteed contracts also creates a sense of competitiveness to ensure that players play at peak performance to keep their roster spot or else be cut at training camp.
No way that someone like Wellwood in his fattyness could have kept his spot in Van or Gomez in Montreal for repeatedly under performing

I also agree with removing no trade clauses. Nothing worse than being a fan and knowing that your star player doesn't want to play for your team but will only select certain locations on where to be traded.
I can only imagine the level of frustration being a Jackets and Nash fan knowing that he's pretty much checked out mentally but still see him on the ice in the jersey of your team.

Sawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:43 PM
  #49
19nazzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 17,189
vCash: 500
Yet another 'issue' that the GMs created for themselves by giving away NTCs/NMCs like they're candy.

__________________
- Sent from my desktop using my fingers
19nazzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2012, 07:56 PM
  #50
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19nazzy View Post
Yet another 'issue' that the GMs created for themselves by giving away NTCs/NMCs like they're candy.
This. This is a problem GM's have brought on themselves.

nhlfan9191 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:57 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.