OT: No Trade Clauses and Getting Dealt

[finchster]

No sir. The player wanted the NTC hence he was willing to take less money to get that. The team did not give him the right to demand a trade to only one team. They agreed they wouldn't trade him because he didn't want to be traded. In St Louis case, he was adamant he wanted to retire in Tampa and that's why he asked for a NTC. Team abided because they had no intentions of ever trading him

We are going around in circles so this is my last post and agree to disagree

Yes, I am sure St Louis wanted a NTC because being able to control your future is so valuable. Maybe in fantasy world players want NTC's to give them evidence that teams will not trade them, but that's rather naive. At the end of the day Tampa got him for less money and he got his control of his career.

As for the bold section, are you sure about that? St Louis asked for a trade in 2009 from then GM Brain Lawton, to only one team, New York. There was evidence of this prior to when it actually happened. Both parties sign contracts with the best intentions, but who knows where that business relationship will be in a few years. If teams are willing to negotiate NTC for less money to the players that's their fault in the end.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

We are going around in circles so this is my last post and agree to disagree

Yes, I am sure St Louis wanted a NTC because being able to control your future is so valuable. Maybe in fantasy world players want NTC's to give them evidence that teams will not trade them, but that's rather naive. At the end of the day Tampa got him for less money and he got his control of his career.

As for the bold section, are you sure about that? St Louis asked for a trade in 2009 from then GM Brain Lawton, to only one team, New York. There was evidence of this prior to when it actually happened. Both parties sign contracts with the best intentions, but who knows where that business relationship will be in a few years. If teams are willing to negotiate NTC for less money to the players that's their fault in the end.

I tell you something... If I'm a GM and we've signed a player with a NTC. Then they ask for a trade and tell me where? I'm telling that player to go **** his hat. You let me do my job and I'll let you do yours.

 

[finchster]

I tell you something... If I'm a GM and we've signed a player with a NTC. Then they ask for a trade and tell me where? I'm telling that player to go **** his hat. You let me do my job and I'll let you do yours.

A disgruntled employee is best for business amirite? This isn't the old days where players were paid nothing and treated like cattle, its a league full of millionaires. Dealing with the wealthy is all about man management and egos.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

A disgruntled employee is best for business amirite? This isn't the old days where players were paid nothing and treated like cattle, its a league full of millionaires. Dealing with the wealthy is all about man management and egos.

Nope. It's not good for business.

But it's probably going to happen from time to time.

And just to be clear... I'm not suggesting treating them cattle. I'm just saying that I don't think that the player should be allowed to push management around.

 

[finchster]

Nope. It's not good for business.

But it's probably going to happen from time to time.

And just to be clear... I'm not suggesting treating them cattle. I'm just saying that I don't think that the player should be allowed to push management around.

In the real world I agree, however, the nature of being a star player means you can push management around and even have a say in who's managing. Maybe I am more touchy on this subject because I recently quit on a contract I was working on here in Russia, however, contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on here (but that's a different story) .