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.

NMC/NTC Question

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-12-2008, 12:58 PM
  #1
Darth Milbury
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 38,438
vCash: 500
NMC/NTC Question

I know this has been asked here before, but if a player with an NMC/NTC gets moved, does the the clause stay in effect?

Let's say, for example, that the Isles had traded Miroslav Satan (who had a NTC) at the beginning of last season. Would Satan's trade clause then be in effect for the new team?

I ask this question because it has signficiant issues for trade value of various players. For example, last summer, the Isles were rumored to be asking about Jovocop. Had Jovocop been willing to come to the Island, the Isles would now have an overpaid player on a longterm deal and they'd be unable to move the contract without the player's permission.

__________________
Man, do I ever miss Oleg Kvasha. If Oleg was here, everything would be OK.
Darth Milbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:00 PM
  #2
flannelman
trite pretentiousnes
 
flannelman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NH
Country: Ireland
Posts: 10,942
vCash: 50
darth, i was unser the impression that once it was waived, it's waived - so the player is movable... but I'm no pro, so someone else probably has a better idea.

flannelman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:04 PM
  #3
Darth Milbury
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 38,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flannelman View Post
darth, i was unser the impression that once it was waived, it's waived - so the player is movable... but I'm no pro, so someone else probably has a better idea.
flannelman - I thought that was the case too, but now I'm not so sure.

I think it is a major issue for trade value. Take a guy like McCabe (and I'm not sure that I want to open this hornet's nest again). Let's say that he was willing to waive that NMC to go east (as has long been rumored) - then would the new team also be stuck with an NMC? I would think that would make him and other players with similar contracts virtually untradeable.

But, if the NMC becomes null and void, then the situation is much different.

Darth Milbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:12 PM
  #4
Rudolf Yaber
Registered User
 
Rudolf Yaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,734
vCash: 500
I suppose it is possible that a NTC/NMC may be contract specific, in that it may be addressed specifically in the contract and not based on a universal rule of thumb.

Of course, without a background in law or the NHL CBA, I could be completely out-to-lunch. I don't see why it would be addressed in the CBA though, which makes me think it might be contract specific.

Rudolf Yaber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:16 PM
  #5
miser
Registered User
 
miser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Milbury View Post
flannelman - I thought that was the case too, but now I'm not so sure.

I think it is a major issue for trade value. Take a guy like McCabe (and I'm not sure that I want to open this hornet's nest again). Let's say that he was willing to waive that NMC to go east (as has long been rumored) - then would the new team also be stuck with an NMC? I would think that would make him and other players with similar contracts virtually untradeable.

But, if the NMC becomes null and void, then the situation is much different.
If not specifically addressed in the CBA, then I would believe it would follow standard contract law and work somewhat like the "assumption" of a contract.
One company buying another does not necessarily assume a contract with a thrid party. However, if the third party agrees to the assumption then the contract remains binding along with the terms and conditions.

miser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:19 PM
  #6
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
My memory isn't what it used to be so I may be mistaken here but Georges Laraque does a lot of radio here in Edmonton and when he originally signed in Pheonix it was with a NTC.

I want to recall that after he was traded to Pittsburgh he at one point mentioned that his NTC was still in effect and when he was deciding between the Penguins and Flames at the deadline he was moved, part of the reason he picked the Penguins was because he was guaranteed a couple kicks at the playoff cat of playing with Crosby.

If you don't mind, I would like to add another question regarding NTC's. It's not worth a new thread but I have been wondering about it.

The other day I was reading one of the endless number of Darcy Tucker articles out there and it was mentioned that the Leafs could send him down to the Marlies to get him off their cap list. This got me thinking;

Tucker has a NTC so obviously if he refuses to waive it then the Leafs are stuck with him. However, what happens if they sent him down to the minors and then exposed him on waivers on the way back up? Assuming a team would take him, is that way to get circumvent the NTC just to him out of the organization?

Now I realize that Toronto would be on the hook for half of his salary which would cost more than a buy out and pretty much makes this specific case unapplicable, but none the less on a theoretical level can it be done?

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:20 PM
  #7
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,245
vCash: 0
I will wait for IB to confirm this--but I believe that when a player waives now movement clause or trade clause--he gets it back--he is waiving in to move the 2nd team and not another team

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
Heaven wont take me and hell is afraid I'd take 0ver
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:34 PM
  #8
Kevin Forbes
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
Tucker has a NTC so obviously if he refuses to waive it then the Leafs are stuck with him. However, what happens if they sent him down to the minors and then exposed him on waivers on the way back up? Assuming a team would take him, is that way to get circumvent the NTC just to him out of the organization?

Now I realize that Toronto would be on the hook for half of his salary which would cost more than a buy out and pretty much makes this specific case unapplicable, but none the less on a theoretical level can it be done?
Columbus did something similar to this with Marchant. After he refused to waive his no-trade to go to Anaheim, they put him on waivers. He passed through once with no one taking him, so they put him on waivers again and the Ducks picked him up.

Kevin Forbes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:42 PM
  #9
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 500
1. If the player has a NTC/NMC currently in effect, he retains it after going to another team whether by trade or via waivers.

2. If the player has a NTC/NMC that has yet to take effect, the acquiring team has the right to decide whether it chooses to be bound by the NMC/NTC.

Examples:
-- If Bryan McCabe waived his NMC to be dealt to the Islanders, he would retain his NMC after the trade and could then exercise it to prevent being assigned to the minors or dealt to the Rangers or any other team.
-- If Martin Erat is traded to the Sharks before his NMC takes effect on July 1, 2009 then the Sharks may elect not to be bound by it ... in which case Erat loses his NMC while with the Sharks; if he's then traded to the Kings after his NMC would have taken effect, the NMC becomes binding on the Kings - but if he's dealt before it takes effect, then the Kings could decide whether to be bound by it or not. [Obviously, if the Sharks elect to be bound by it, then Erat retains it once he's eligible to exercise it.]

__________________
No promises this time.
Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:46 PM
  #10
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Milbury View Post
I know this has been asked here before, but if a player with an NMC/NTC gets moved, does the the clause stay in effect?

Let's say, for example, that the Isles had traded Miroslav Satan (who had a NTC) at the beginning of last season. Would Satan's trade clause then be in effect for the new team?

I ask this question because it has signficiant issues for trade value of various players. For example, last summer, the Isles were rumored to be asking about Jovocop. Had Jovocop been willing to come to the Island, the Isles would now have an overpaid player on a longterm deal and they'd be unable to move the contract without the player's permission.
The clause stays in effect unless there's some specific condition in the player's contract that says otherwise--that would be the exception though and I'm not aware of any contracts like that offhand. In your example I would expect Satan's NTC to remain in effect.

Now if a player is traded to a team BEFORE their NTC or NMC kicks in, then it is not binding on the new team unless the new team explicitly agrees to be bound by it (in writing to the player/NHL). So for example if Patrick Marleau (who has a NTC going into effect July 1st) were traded in the next couple weeks his new team would not be bound to that NTC clause.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:46 PM
  #11
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Forbes View Post
Columbus did something similar to this with Marchant. After he refused to waive his no-trade to go to Anaheim, they put him on waivers. He passed through once with no one taking him, so they put him on waivers again and the Ducks picked him up.
Thanks for that, so was Columbus still on the hook for half of his contract when that happened?

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:51 PM
  #12
Darth Milbury
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 38,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues View Post
1. If the player has a NTC/NMC currently in effect, he retains it after going to another team whether by trade or via waivers.

2. If the player has a NTC/NMC that has yet to take effect, the acquiring team has the right to decide whether it chooses to be bound by the NMC/NTC.

Examples:
-- If Bryan McCabe waived his NMC to be dealt to the Islanders, he would retain his NMC after the trade and could then exercise it to prevent being assigned to the minors or dealt to the Rangers or any other team.
-- If Martin Erat is traded to the Sharks before his NMC takes effect on July 1, 2009 then the Sharks may elect not to be bound by it ... in which case Erat loses his NMC while with the Sharks; if he's then traded to the Kings after his NMC would have taken effect, the NMC becomes binding on the Kings - but if he's dealt before it takes effect, then the Kings could decide whether to be bound by it or not. [Obviously, if the Sharks elect to be bound by it, then Erat retains it once he's eligible to exercise it.]
You rock, IB. Thanks.

Darth Milbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:51 PM
  #13
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
Thanks for that, so was Columbus still on the hook for half of his contract when that happened?
No. He was put through regular waivers twice.

Columbus never sent him down to the AHL and recalled him which would have exposed him to re-entry waivers and the 50% contract situation.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:52 PM
  #14
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
No. He was put through regular waivers twice.

Columbus never sent him down to the AHL and recalled him which would have exposed him to re-entry waivers and the 50% contract situation.
So going back to the Tucker example then, can Toronto not do the same thing and get him off the books all together?

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:56 PM
  #15
flannelman
trite pretentiousnes
 
flannelman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NH
Country: Ireland
Posts: 10,942
vCash: 50
thanks for the clarification, IB.

I was wrong. Not the first, nor the last time.

but the Waivers and Players with NTC's is interesting.

flannelman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 01:56 PM
  #16
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
So going back to the Tucker example then, can Toronto not do the same thing and get him off the books all together?
Since he's not subject to the "35 and older" clause, then they could waive him and assign him to the minors if he clears and get him off the books for cap purposes.

Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 02:05 PM
  #17
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
So going back to the Tucker example then, can Toronto not do the same thing and get him off the books all together?
Yes, Toronto can do the same thing, assuming another team wants him.

They potential cap difference is whether Tucker departs via "regular waivers", via "re-entry waivers", or just stays in the AHL.

Situation A: Tucker stays on the Leafs, but the team exposes him to "regular waivers". If another team claims him then he's off the books. Note: it's not mandatory to send a player to the AHL after exposing them to waivers.

Situation B: Tucker is sent down to the AHL (note: before sending Tucker to the AHL, the Leafs would have to put him through "regular waivers"). If Tucker stays in the AHL the Leafs still have to pay him but he's off the salary cap.

Situation C: Tucker is sent down to the AHL and then the team recalls him. In this situation Tucker must pass through "re-entry waivers" to rejoin the Leafs. If another team claims him then Toronto is on the books for 50% of his salary which will count against the salary cap.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 03:24 PM
  #18
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,245
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues View Post
1. If the player has a NTC/NMC currently in effect, he retains it after going to another team whether by trade or via waivers.

2. If the player has a NTC/NMC that has yet to take effect, the acquiring team has the right to decide whether it chooses to be bound by the NMC/NTC.

Examples:
-- If Bryan McCabe waived his NMC to be dealt to the Islanders, he would retain his NMC after the trade and could then exercise it to prevent being assigned to the minors or dealt to the Rangers or any other team.
-- If Martin Erat is traded to the Sharks before his NMC takes effect on July 1, 2009 then the Sharks may elect not to be bound by it ... in which case Erat loses his NMC while with the Sharks; if he's then traded to the Kings after his NMC would have taken effect, the NMC becomes binding on the Kings - but if he's dealt before it takes effect, then the Kings could decide whether to be bound by it or not. [Obviously, if the Sharks elect to be bound by it, then Erat retains it once he's eligible to exercise it.]
I knew you would pop into this discussion

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 03:50 PM
  #19
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 500
I have a staff of 14 scouring the site 24/7 looking for stuff like this.



No, I really don't - I just happened to see it.

Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 04:06 PM
  #20
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues View Post
1. If the player has a NTC/NMC currently in effect, he retains it after going to another team whether by trade or via waivers.

2. If the player has a NTC/NMC that has yet to take effect, the acquiring team has the right to decide whether it chooses to be bound by the NMC/NTC.

Examples:
-- If Bryan McCabe waived his NMC to be dealt to the Islanders, he would retain his NMC after the trade and could then exercise it to prevent being assigned to the minors or dealt to the Rangers or any other team.
-- If Martin Erat is traded to the Sharks before his NMC takes effect on July 1, 2009 then the Sharks may elect not to be bound by it ... in which case Erat loses his NMC while with the Sharks; if he's then traded to the Kings after his NMC would have taken effect, the NMC becomes binding on the Kings - but if he's dealt before it takes effect, then the Kings could decide whether to be bound by it or not. [Obviously, if the Sharks elect to be bound by it, then Erat retains it once he's eligible to exercise it.]

Is there any reason why a team might elect to be bound to said players impending NMC/NTC?

Could the Predators make a stipulate in a trade that the Sharks must accept Erat's NMC in order for the deal to be completed?

Furious George is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 07:08 PM
  #21
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Furious George View Post
Is there any reason why a team might elect to be bound to said players impending NMC/NTC?
Good relations with the players; if you leave the perception that you'll screw the players when given a chance, word gets around and eventually they'll either ignore you or try like hell to screw you over when you really want them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Furious George View Post
Could the Predators make a stipulate in a trade that the Sharks must accept Erat's NMC in order for the deal to be completed?
No - that's something that gets decided by the acquiring team. The player may ask for that to happen, but nothing compels that team to accept it if they have right of refusal.

Irish Blues 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 07:54 AM.

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.