NHL Players Reportedly Bothered By Jacob Trouba Trade Saga With Rangers

[Viqsi]

Nah sorry, this is bullshit and you as a CBJ fan should be outraged at what he did.

He was unwilling to waive it for CBJ, who had a deal in place, but he was willing to waive it for Anaheim.

The “I need to be close to my family shtick” evidently wasn’t his top consideration with this, considering he passed up moving to Ohio for California. He’ll only be contracted for another season and a half anyway, so this wasn’t a long haul decision of where he’d be playing.

Seems like being close to his family wasn’t all there was to this.

Your logical fallacy is appeal to emotion

You attempted to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com

I viewed that as more "well, if I can't be there, I can at least try to anticipate the next move" - i.e. presuming that his wife is more likely post-residency to find work in the Los Angeles area than central Ohio. Which, well, we could turn this into a debate on the cities involved w/r/t healthcare industry presence, but that's a side point.

 

[Tawnos]

This isn’t it and you as a CBJ fan should be outraged at what he did.

He was unwilling to waive it for CBJ, who had a deal in place, but he was willing to waive it for Anaheim.

The “I need to be close to my family shtick” evidently wasn’t his top consideration with this, considering he passed up moving to Ohio for California. He’ll only be contracted for another season and a half anyway, so this wasn’t a long haul decision of where he’d be playing.

Seems like being close to his family wasn’t all there was to this.

There’s little difference for an NHL player whether they’re playing for Columbus or Anaheim in terms of being close to family during the season. His ability to be home with his wife over the remainder of the season would basically be the same in either spot. His whole goal was to not move at all. Once that was off the table, the priorities change.

Most likely, he chose Anaheim because his wife’s post-residency career prospects are better in the LA metro than they are in Columbus.

 

[Viqsi]

lol, what are they planning on negotiating??

"We want to negotiate that if our NMC expires, that we are allowed to still block trades and moves" .

There is nothing to negotiate. The whole article is a joke.

Well, if you read the article...

"I think that they are going to ask the players association to do is have a conversation in the upcoming CBA negotiations that maybe there should be just one form of protection.”

Or, "M-NTC means waiver protection too". Which it currently doesn't. I guess that's a negotiation.

 

[JackSlater]

Read the article, nobody said they did. They're talking about a discussion point for the next CBA.

I read the article, thanks for the advice though. I didn't claim anyone said they did - read the post you quoted again.

 

[Tawnos]

lol, what are they planning on negotiating??

"We want to negotiate that if our NMC expires, that we are allowed to still block trades and moves" .

There is nothing to negotiate. The whole article is a joke.

Seems pretty obvious to me. They’re going to try to get waiver transfers covered by NTCs. If you can’t be traded to a team, that team also can’t claim you on waivers without your permission.

 

[King Woodballs]

He had one. The situation is more nuanced than that.

If he had a full no move. He is finishing his contact playing for the Rangers.
The team loopholed him. Simple as that.

 

[KovalchukFistPump]

Southern California is nice. He and the Mrs will survive on $8 million a year for two years. Heck he could always retire and be Mr Mom…he should have enough saved away. I had a couple incidents when I was in the military about transfers: one where I had no choice, the other when the detailer told me to choose either a cold isolated station or a warm isolated station. I chose the latter. But then I knew the risks both when I enlisted and chose my rate. And I wasn’t getting $8 million a year..just an extra $18 a month for isolated duty.

Trouba used going to New York to get a big fat contract that he never would have gotten in Winnipeg. Time to pay the fiddler, Jacob. At least with the Ducks your season will be over in Mid April

Well his wife is tied to a New York hospital for her career for at least the rest of this season. That one is a gray area because tons of other players have to spend time away from family or ask their family to make life sacrifices. It's part of the deal when you get paid such big money.

But the Troubas also decided that January 2024 would be a great time to have a child and that contributes to him not wanting to spend even any time away. That is something I don't understand unless it's a power play by him thinking "I'm well liked in the locker room, they would never get rid of me". Or maybe he really thinks his "leadership" and the fear he puts into injuring other players made him worth his contract?

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Boo f***in hoo

 

[dgibb10]

Just fight for an M-NTC +NMC. You can be traded, but can't be waived. It's rare but a few players have it I think.

Having "teams on a player's NTC aren't allowed to claim him" would be ridiculous.

Imagine any guy with a full NTC then being able to pass through waivers for free.

I'd start giving guys making 1 mill NTCs and ensuring I can send them up and down as I please to cheat the waiver system and give me a bunch of injury depth

 

[StreetHawk]

Seems pretty obvious to me. They’re going to try to get waiver transfers covered by NTCs. If you can’t be traded to a team, that team also can’t claim you on waivers without your permission.

Within the confines of the current rules. The NMC protects you. But if you do not have one or it goes away like it did for Trouba after 5 years then that’s just business.

Reality is when a big cap hit player that isn’t playing up to their cap hit number, is being shopped, unlikely to get much interest from other good teams.

Trouba was valued enough by clubs not on his list to take him at his full cap hit if he went on waivers.

 

[Viqsi]

Here is his contract, you can see year by year what he actually had.

https://puckpedia.com/player/jacob-trouba

If he had a full no move. He is finishing his contact playing for the Rangers.
The team loopholed him. Simple as that.

This is not actually a refutation of the point I was making, which had to do with the original deadline of his wife's residency.

I would have thought the rational followup would be to also crack down on stuff like the way he forced his way out of the Jets, but it seems like the consensus here is to be spiteful and bitter rather than come up with constructive solutions.

 

[dgibb10]

Also looking back how did it take until 2020 to eliminate

"trading a guy before his NTC kicks in invalidates his NTC". Wild that it took that long

The article implies that the players will push for a NTC to become a NMC only to the specific teams listed in the clause. Put a player with a NTC on waivers and he’s only available to the teams he’d be able to be traded to. Part of me feels like that does make sense. I wouldn’t really have a problem with that adjustment.

Regarding Trouba specifically, he’s the one who started playing hardball with his M-NTC by creating a list meant to prevent the Rangers from moving him at all. Just for example, Anaheim might not have been on his no trade list if it were just about where he would or would not like to play. Instead, they were on the list because they were one of the teams with the cap space to take on his contract. He took his M-NTC, which is supposed to be about giving the team flexibility while leaving the player with some control, and turned it into a full NTC. It’s within his rights to use the clause in that way, but in making that choice he set himself up to have the team play hardball right back.

That would be horrific.

Imagine being able to prevent any team from claiming your player on waivers by giving them an NTC.

Simply just negotiate a modified clause that says, you can be traded, but can't be sent down.

Eg with Kurtis Macdermid on NJD, give him an NTC so we can send him up and down as we please.

 

[Viqsi]

View attachment 942017
Also looking back how did it take until 2020 to eliminate

"trading a guy before his NTC kicks in invalidates his NTC". Wild that it took that long

That's an example of seeing Evolution Of Legalese in action. Somebody comes up with some dipshit reading of the rules, folks try to call them on it and it turns out the rules don't actually expressly forbid such dipshittery despite it never being intended, so it has to be written down explicitly because somebody just had to be a dipshit.

In related news, people suck.

 

[Tawnos]

Just fight for an M-NTC +NMC. You can be traded, but can't be waived. It's rare but a few players have it I think.

Having "teams on a player's NTC aren't allowed to claim him" would be ridiculous.

Imagine any guy with a full NTC then being able to pass through waivers for free.

I'd start giving guys making 1 mill NTCs and ensuring I can send them up and down as I please to cheat the waiver system and give me a bunch of injury depth

This represents a misunderstanding of the NTC. It doesn’t say you can’t trade a player to a given team. It says you can’t trade a player to that team without their permission.

Waivers would work the same way. Let’s say a player has a full NTC. He gets put on waivers. Interested teams put in their claims. The player can choose which team he’d accept a transfer to. If no team puts in a claim or he refuses every team that did, he can be assigned to the minors. Do you really think that players making $1m, who are likely on the bubble, wouldn’t accept a claim from a team that wants to play him in the NHL?

I would envision the M-NTC version of this to be a two tier process. The teams not on the no trade list follow normal waiver rules. Then if none of them put in a claim, it goes to the process I described above but only for the teams on the no trade list.

 

[dgibb10]

I actually do agree that players should be able to negotiate waiver-pickup protection like they do trade protection

That is a bad idea that would lead to manipulation far too easily

You'd see NTCs going to depth guys who teams want to send up and down from the minors without risking waivers.

Agents should fight harder for M-NTC+NMC, where you can be traded to teams not on your NTC, but cannot be waived at all.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Entitled babies with overblown expectations. Entitlement is an epidemic in today’s society.

Moving on.

 

[dgibb10]

This represents a misunderstanding of the NTC. It doesn’t say you can’t trade a player to a given team. It says you can’t trade a player to that team without their permission.

Waivers would work the same way. Let’s say a player has a full NTC. He gets put on waivers. Interested teams put in their claims. The player can choose which team he’d accept a transfer to. If no team puts in a claim or he refuses every team that did, he can be assigned to the minors. Do you really think that players making $1m, who are likely on the bubble, wouldn’t accept a claim from a team that wants to play him in the NHL?

In desirable destinations yes and for cap manipulation purposes.

Why have guys in the press box when you can give them NTCs, waive them whenever you want, and accrue cap space throughout the season while having them freely available with no risk of losing them, AND getting them game experience with your AHL club.

If you're good enough to earn an NTC in the current state, you aren't waivers material anyway outside of this threat. So just fight harder for the currently available clause that says you can't be sent down.

Dougie Hamilton for example has this in his contract. His NTC goes to an M-NTC in 2025-26, but he retains the NMC that says he can't be waived.

Adding ways to cheat waivers is a bad idea

 

[Boo Boo]

The days of players taking a discount for partial no trade are over I guess

 

[Tawnos]

In desirable destinations yes and for cap manipulation purposes.

Why have guys in the press box when you can give them NTCs, waive them whenever you want, and accrue cap space throughout the season while having them freely available with no risk of losing them, AND getting them game experience with your AHL club.

If you're good enough to earn an NTC in the current state, you aren't waivers material anyway outside of this threat. So just fight harder for the currently available clause that says you can't be sent down.

Dougie Hamilton for example has this in his contract. His NTC goes to an M-NTC in 2025-26, but he retains the NMC that says he can't be waived.

Adding ways to cheat waivers is a bad idea

Of course there would be players who wouldn’t want to transfer for various reasons, but that’s why you don’t give those players these clauses.

Waivers already allows teams to do what you’re talking about for 30 days after being cleared, but they don’t do it for a lot of reasons. Your concerns are overblown at best, but really they’re just not valid.

 

[dgibb10]

Of course there would be players who wouldn’t want to transfer for various reasons, but that’s why you don’t give those players these clauses.

Waivers already allows teams to do what you’re talking about for 30 days after being cleared, but they don’t do it for a lot of reasons. Your concerns are overblown at best, but really they’re just not valid.

"30 days after being cleared"

Which means they have to clear in the first place.

Which is why they don't do it.

If you didn't have to risk them to waivers at all, you would see it way more often.

You are suggesting opening a very blatant loophole for cap manipulation.

The biggest example you'd see of this is enforcers. Eg Ryan Reaves, Kurtis MacDermid, who would sit in the minors to get playing time, and get paid while costing nothing against the cap, coming up for a game whenever needed (counting against the cap for 1-2 days worth) Allowing you to save cap space and cheat the system.

The solution to the current issue is simple. If you don't want to risk being placed on waivers, negotiate it into your contract using the currently available tool to prevent you from being placed on waivers.

 

[SladeWilson23]

What loophole? It’s the difference between a NTC and NMC.

I get that. Yet I think the players want to eliminate or at least reduce the risk of being waived. Loophole was the wrong word.

 

[dgibb10]

I get that. Yet I think the players want to eliminate or at least reduce the risk of being waived. Loophole was the wrong word.

Simple solution.

Fight for a partial NTC+NMC.

NMC also I believe protects you from expansion. I don't know if a full NTC does

 

[Regal]

It's a valid question from a legal contract negotiation standpoint. Everyone acknowledges nothing on this topic would be addressed prior to the next CBA.

Yea I think a lot of the early responses are ignoring what’s being discussed. It’s not just “poor Jacob”, it’s “should we change how a NTC and waivers work in the next CBA?”

 

[Tawnos]

"30 days after being cleared"

Which means they have to clear in the first place.

Which is why they don't do it.

If you didn't have to risk them to waivers at all, you would see it way more often.

You are suggesting opening a very blatant loophole for cap manipulation.

The biggest example you'd see of this is enforcers. Eg Ryan Reaves, Kurtis MacDermid, who would sit in the minors to get playing time, and get paid while costing nothing against the cap, coming up for a game whenever needed (counting against the cap for 1-2 days worth) Allowing you to save cap space and cheat the system.

The solution to the current issue is simple. If you don't want to risk being placed on waivers, negotiate it into your contract using the currently available tool to prevent you from being placed on waivers.

All of those guys would get claims put in for them. The only difference is they’d get to choose where they want to go, which includes the option to stay in the same organization. It’s the same risk with a minor modification.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You know what else is excellent waiver protection?

Not sucking ass at your job.

"I can't believe they fired me for nonperformance" is such a bogus rant without even getting into any of the legalese weeds, it's a non sequitur conversation for Trouba, just reads like shirking

I don't mind the conversation here of course, just that he's bringing it up like that's the actual problem