Taro T Posted August 12, 2020 Report Share Posted August 12, 2020 3 hours ago, dudacek said: This was changed in the CBA that was signed last month. The clause now stays and transfers with the contract. It’s up to the player whether he or not he wants waive it. Wasn't aware of that. Don't suppose you know where a copy of the new CBA might be found by any chance? Looked for it a couple of weeks ago but couldn't find it (all links were either to the old one or just recaps of the recent negotiations). Danke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 12, 2020 Report Share Posted August 12, 2020 4 hours ago, rakish said: I'm going to argue the other side on this. The reason the player loses his NTC is contract law. If you waive a clause in your contract, you don't get to reclaim that power. In this case, the clause was never waived, it hadn't come into existence yet, so he won't lose it when he moves to a different team. I might be wrong. The old CBA EXPLICITLY said that a NMC/NTC only had to be honored by the team agreeing to it. Apparently, the new CBA changed that provision. (Still haven't seen the new 1, so am going off what has been reported.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 38 minutes ago, Taro T said: Wasn't aware of that. Don't suppose you know where a copy of the new CBA might be found by any chance? Looked for it a couple of weeks ago but couldn't find it (all links were either to the old one or just recaps of the recent negotiations). Danke. I haven’t seen it, but this is where I read the news: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/potential-cba-modifications-emerging-nhl-nhlpa-continue-negotiations/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 55 minutes ago, dudacek said: I haven’t seen it, but this is where I read the news: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/potential-cba-modifications-emerging-nhl-nhlpa-continue-negotiations/ Thanks for the link. Still would like to read it directly if anybody else has the link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 19 minutes ago, Taro T said: Thanks for the link. Still would like to read it directly if anybody else has the link. https://www.nhlpa.com/the-pa/cba 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 2 hours ago, Taro T said: The old CBA EXPLICITLY said that a NMC/NTC only had to be honored by the team agreeing to it. Apparently, the new CBA changed that provision. (Still haven't seen the new 1, so am going off what has been reported.) I believe that this was only the case if the player in question waived the NTC as part of the trade. If the player is traded before the NTC takes affect, it remains in place and takes affect with the new team whenever it was scheduled to. No? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 1 hour ago, Curt said: I believe that this was only the case if the player in question waived the NTC as part of the trade. If the player is traded before the NTC takes affect, it remains in place and takes affect with the new team whenever it was scheduled to. No? No. The 2013 CBA EXPLICITLY stated in 11.8(a) ... If the Player is Traded or claimed on Waivers prior to the no-Trade or no-move clause taking effect, the clause does not bind the acquiring Club." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 1 hour ago, Brawndo said: https://www.nhlpa.com/the-pa/cba Awesome! Skimmed it and saw where NMCs/NTCs DO retain their original terms regardless of if the player gets traded or claimed off waivers now. Will have to look closer to see when it said the MOU needs to get incorporated directly into the old CBA to craft the new one. That new CBA document won't truly exist until then though all the terms of the MOU are binding as of whenever both sides ratified it a month or so ago. So will stop looking for it until after that date (presumably sometime this fall). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 This isn’t it Kevyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresparaavida Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 32 minutes ago, Brawndo said: This isn’t it Kevyn Waiting for it to happen before I start panicking. If it does happen- I will panic. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kas23 Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 The board would melt down if this guy walks for nothing. Pilut x1000. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 (edited) 17 minutes ago, kas23 said: The board would melt down if this guy walks for nothing. Pilut x1000. This. Can’t see any way that makes sense. His qualifying offer is $3.3 million. That’s not any sort of back breaker and certainly tradeable. Never mind that he’s worth that number. I hope this has no basis other than wild speculation based on the front office cost-cutting. Edited August 13, 2020 by dudacek 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabrielor Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 That's some Botterill-level asset handling. That would be a 0-star start for a rookie GM... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsb Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 3 minutes ago, kas23 said: The board would melt down if this guy walks for nothing. Pilut x1000. And That, yikes what a total waste of an asset if that happens 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 I don’t like Montour’s freestyle play and want him off the team. That being said, if they don’t qualify him, and let him go with no return...there are bad things that lie ahead...bad things. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 54 minutes ago, Brawndo said: This isn’t it Kevyn Can't see any scenario where Montour simply walks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 1 hour ago, Brawndo said: This isn’t it Kevyn Well that would certainly put the fanbase in a tailspin. If they are that broke on liquid assets then they should sell the team to another Buffalo owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 1 hour ago, dudacek said: This. Can’t see any way that makes sense. His qualifying offer is $3.3 million. That’s not any sort of back breaker and certainly tradeable. Never mind that he’s worth that number. I hope this has no basis other than wild speculation based on the front office cost-cutting. Pittsburgh, Toronto and Winnipeg are three teams looking for RHD. Jared McCann was scratched by the Pens, make that move. Johassen, Kerfoot or Kapanen. Andrew Copp from Winnipeg. Hell even take a Draft Pick or Prospect, it’s better than nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresparaavida Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 Talked with my source, said he had not heard that. Thought it was funny, wondering where they had heard that. 4 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabrielor Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 5 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said: Talked with my source, said he had not heard that. Thought it was funny, wondering where they had heard that. Friedmann has a recent (Botterill era) history of leaking Sabres news, and then being wrong, so it's not surprising. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashsabre Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 7 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said: Talked with my source, said he had not heard that. Thought it was funny, wondering where they had heard that. Yeah, it makes no sense. Half the league is looking for RHD. Montour should bring back a quality top 6 forward piece. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 If you think about it from outside of the Sabres it makes sense. Somebody just tells Friedman to put that rumor out there because they want some leverage in trade talks. Friedman does because that someone gives him insider info. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresparaavida Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: If you think about it from outside of the Sabres it makes sense. Somebody just tells Friedman to put that rumor out there because they want some leverage in trade talks. Friedman does because that someone gives him insider info. If that kind of thing does happen, wouldn't GMs put 0 stock in that kind of thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 2 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said: If that kind of thing does happen, wouldn't GMs put 0 stock in that kind of thing? Sure but Adams is a Freshmen and I bet some other NHL gm's also would believe it. It's all mind games and I 100% believe things are leaked to these national guys to help with trades/leverage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 13, 2020 Report Share Posted August 13, 2020 18 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: If you think about it from outside of the Sabres it makes sense. Somebody just tells Friedman to put that rumor out there because they want some leverage in trade talks. Friedman does because that someone gives him insider info. What leverage is gained against Adams by having a ridiculous leaked story he'll let Montour walk circulating? All he has to do is reply he isn't Botterill & Montour isn't Pilut (who will likely be tendered a QO to retain his rights if/when he comes back btw) and that leverage has shifted to the new guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.