AND so it’s well underway, the demonizing of players who either refuse to waive their no-trade clauses or are uncertain whether to so.
Wade Redden was called selfish when he rejected Ottawa’s request to waive the no-trade in his contract. Mats Sundin already is being called self-interested for his obvious lack of enthusiasm for doing so in Toronto.
Let’s make this as clear as possible for all those who can’t seem to stop piling on the athletes, no matter the issue. No-trade and/or no-movement clauses are not mere contractual afterthoughts. These are not simply cherries on top of multi-million-dollar sundaes.
The fact is, a no-trade or no-movement clause is as integral a part of the contract as the money itself, as often as not the critical factor in determining a free agent’s choice of destination.
Redden likely would not have eschewed unrestricted free agency to remain in Ottawa two summers ago – when Zdeno Chara did not, by the way – if he had not gained his no-movement clause.
For better or worse, Patrik Elias signed for $42 million over seven years with the Devils rather than for $42M over six years with the Rangers when he became unrestricted two years ago because New Jersey gave him a no-movement clause – e.g., no waivers in addition to no trade – and the Blueshirts would not.
Give up a no-trade because it’s in the best interests of the franchise? Sure, and why not just give up half the money too if the GM makes such a request, which, by the way, he is forbidden to do under the collective bargaining agreement. Good thing, or We would never stop hearing about an athlete’s obligation to restructure his contract for the good of the team.
Come to think of it, I think writers and broadcasters should give up their vacations, too, if editors and program directors make the request for the good of their newspapers and networks.
(That’s a joke, Mr. Murdoch.)
It never ends, does it? The players operate under a triple-cap, escrow system and yet they always are expected to give back what they have gained through negotiations, either individually or collectively. Teams always find ways to leak information to place a player in a negative light when it suits their purposes even though the players are the product. Smart marketing.
Somehow, now we’re told that no-trade/no-movement clauses have to be stricken from the next CBA because they’re bad for hockey, because, once again, the players must save the league’s general managers from themselves.
You know how to put an end to no-trade and no-movement clauses? By the general manager saying “no.” That’s how. With resolve from management, not public pressure on the work force.
*
Next Tuesday will present Glen Sather with a fork in the frozen road. The GM will either choose Route 68, or he will choose to go in a different direction.
If the Rangers keep Jaromir Jagr – and, yes, here I go again, to coin a phrase – Sather needs to find out what it will take to get Bobby Holik out of Atlanta as a rental.
Everyone seems to, uh, misremember the first tour of duty on Broadway. Fact is, if the Rangers hadn’t bought out Holik in the amnesty period following the lockout, Tom Renney would have appointed him captain of the 2005-06 team. Fact is, Holik is the perfect center for Jagr at this stage of No. 68’s career.
Holik doesn’t need the puck. He has never pretended to be creative. He will go to the front, and he will clear out space for Jagr. He will pound on the Mike Komisareks of the world if they assault the team captain. He will work with Jagr the way he did when the two men were linemates for 20 games at the end of 2003-04.
He might be an answer on the power play. And it the Rangers get Holik – and only if it’s for the right price – they will be able to move Chris Drury to the wing.
Sather doesn’t like Holik? Who cares? The GM doesn’t have to be his friend, but only his boss for a couple of months.
*
Listen, the number does seem a little bit high for Henrik Lundqvist. But the $6.875M average isn’t at all out of whack if The King plays up to his royal form, certainly not with the cap likely to increase to between $56-57M next year, with anticipated annual 5-to-8 percent increases on top of that as long as the Canadian dollar doesn’t crash.
The Rangers chose to pay Lundqvist. The alternative was to become the Lightning. Who’s paying the higher price in nets?
We’re told that Florida is exploring a multi-player trade in which Olli Jokinen would go to San Jose for Patrick Marleau, but wouldn’t it make much more sense for the Panthers to simply trade in GM-coach Jacques Martin?
Finally, the faces and titles change but the low-grade environment in Ed Snider‘s Philadelphia never really does, witness the constant scoreboard video replays of Bully Steve Downie beating up on Fedor Tyutin last Saturday.
Or maybe the Rangers should simply play the “highlight” video of Colton Orr breaking Todd Fedoruk‘s face every five minutes whenever the Flyers come to the Garden?