You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on LA Kings Talk within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. I've noticed lately when people have been discussing potential trades and destinations for some of our players, that they dismiss the availability of several of the guys (eg Blake
I've noticed lately when people have been discussing potential trades and destinations for some of our players, that they dismiss the availability of several of the guys (eg Blake and Handzus) due to the NTC's in their contracts. I assumed that guys with a NTC would have to agree on a potential trade before being moved. This quote interested me
Quote:
What if a player involved in a transaction has a "no trade" clause?
No trade clauses can vary from player to player. For example, a player may have a list of teams that he has agreed to be traded to. The League requires written documentation from the player that he has waived his no trade clause. If applicable, the documentation must also stipulate which teams the player has agreed it is permissible for him to be traded to.
Does this mean that Handzus for instance could potentially have a llist of 10+ teams that he has agreed to be traded to written into his contract already?
I've noticed lately when people have been discussing potential trades and destinations for some of our players, that they dismiss the availability of several of the guys (eg Blake and Handzus) due to the NTC's in their contracts. I assumed that guys with a NTC would have to agree on a potential trade before being moved. This quote interested me
Does this mean that Handzus for instance could potentially have a llist of 10+ teams that he has agreed to be traded to written into his contract already?
I haven't really been criticizing Dean signing Handzus so far, but I have doubts about giving a NMC to a player in his condition. Seriously. Not even a NTC, but a NMC?! I can't agree with that one.
BTW, just read the "other" point of view on these things.
Maybe that shows that LA isn't a destination that free agents are interested in and DL needed to add that security to bring a player of his calibre here. It kind of sucks but might be the reality of it. I haven't given up on Handzus yet though.
I'm not ciriticizing Handzus's signature yet, I'm just saying that I wouldn't give the NMC to a guy who was severely injured (with a problematic type of injury). What if it became chronical, like it was with another Dean's acquisition? We managed to buy that guy out, we would get stuck with Handzus forever. If I understand the NMC correctly, he would just have to be on IR forever?
I have a feeling Dean likes to risk in such situations. He probably likes getting guys coming from injury, giving him long contracts and getting a discount because of the risk involved. On the other hand he is probably one of the most cautious GM's when it comes to risks involving young players. Strange.
__________________ This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World.
No trade clauses 
CBGB
