- Feb 23, 2014
- 26,885
- 83,823
Lempo--you said earlier in this (or possibly another thread) that Detroit negotiating with Ned's agent prior to any trade would be tampering. If that is the case, you and NO are arguing that Carolina's front office went out of its way to ask Detroit if they would meet Ned's $3M demand because the Canes front office, while not valuing Ned in Raleigh, wanted him to be in his preferred location in the NHL. Sorry, I just don't buy that.
Yes, and in other other thread I posted the article about how creatively tampering happens. (At least some) agents feel their job is to know the potential markets for their imdividual player much better than the NHL bylaws technically would allow them to do. This is also a matter that hugely impacts on how big a tithe the agent himself will get.
What I'm told is, by the news article Ned was golfing in the afternoon of Thursday 22nd, when he heard of the trade.
What I know for sure is, at 2 p.m. on that same day Detroit announced they have agreed to terms. So it happened snappy.
What I'm pretty certain of, Canes didn't negotiate Ned's new contract with DRW, but Ned's agent did.
What I understand from specifically the Trouba trade is, whether a trade of a pending RFA happens and what terms it happens on, is hugely dependent on if the acquiring team feel or know whether they can get the RFA signed onto a certain kind of SPC.
What I know for certain is, nowadays #65 in the MOU to extend the CBA forbids attaching to the trade a condition of compensation that dependent on if the aqcuiring team can get the traded pending free agent re-signed ("The restriction -- shall only be applicable when the Traded Player has a current or future NHL SPC at the time of the Trade").
What I can logically deduct is, because of #65 teams and agents will have to come up with new ways to facilitate a trade of a player in cases where the value of the traded pending free agent is hugely dependent on whether and on what kind of contract said pending free agent will re-sign.
What I also can logically deduct is, when you realize that you can't get your pending free agent signed on the terms agreeable to you (and are in risk to have him forcibly signed on unacceptable terms imposed on you by the Arbitrator), economically thinking all you have left is to try recover as much assets and goodwill as you can.
The logical thing to do is to try find a place where the pending RFA might want to go and where he might sign a more team-friendly contract than elsewhere, so the compensation coming back to you would be as good as possible. Such accommodation also has the positive that maybe some goodwill is created among the potentially signable/tradeable players around the league when they see that you try to trade your pending free agents in a player-friendly manner.
Last edited: