The latest on Travis Zajac, Brayden Schenn, Lars Eller and Dustin Byfuglien in part one of today’s NHL rumor mill.
Highlights from Friedman’s latest “30 Thoughts.”
SPORTSNET: Elliotte Friedman reports a question being asked by agents and team executives regarding a future expansion draft is if players with no-movement clauses or partial no-trade clauses will be draft-exempt.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: It’s something I’ve looked into, but the CBA doesn’t appear to address that point. If players carrying those clauses aren’t exempt, it could be used as a means for teams with limited cap space to free up salary, provided of course the player is claimed by an expansion club. For now, that’s not something I expect the league to specifically address until approval is given by the Board of Governors to add new franchises. And if the comments of BoG chairman and Boston Bruins owners Jeremy Jacobs are anything to go by (I know, proceed with caution!), expansion might not be the certainty we’ve assumed it to be.
Travis Zajac’s agent shoots down trade rumors about his client.
Agent Kurt Overhardt, who represents New Jersey Devils center Travis Zajac, pushed back hard against speculation suggesting his client would be traded. Friedman claims Toronto Maple Leafs general manager (and former Devils GM) Lou Lamoriello likes Zajac, but there’s been no substantive discussions with New Jersey.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: As Friedman notes, Zajac also has a full no-trade clause, giving him complete control of the situation. He reportedly wants to remain with the Devils. Overhardt claims there’s no truth to medial speculation that his client is being traded. So much for those “Zajac to Toronto” rumors.
The Dallas Stars will carry eight defensemen rather than risk a rival club plucking Jamie Oleksiak off waivers.
Friedman thinks a few teams have contacted Montreal Canadiens GM Marc Bergervin regarding his plans for defenseman Jarred Tinordi. He believes Bergevin is reluctant to put Tinordi on waivers, meaning the struggling blueliner remains on the Habs roster “or they do something”.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: In other words, that “something” would be a trade. CTV’s Brian Wilde thinks the Habs should shop Tinordi, who hasn’t developed into the big shutdown defenseman they hoped he would be, to give the kid a fresh start elsewhere. Could be worth keeping an eye on in the coming days. Hey, maybe they ship Tinordi to Dallas for Oleksiak? The two clubs have a recent trade history.
Speaking of the Canadiens, their recent shift of Lars Eller to left wing to accommodate more Alex Galchenyuk to center has prompted more speculation over his future in Montreal.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: I think we’ll have to wait and see how the season plays out. Eller was the subject of trade speculation at last year’s trade deadline and during the offseason, but Bergevin seems unwilling to move him.
Philadelphia Flyers GM Ron Hextall received some inquiries regarding winger Brayden Schenn following his recent comments that Schenn was “ok” in training camp. However, Hextall didn’t mean for his remarks to come across as disappointment in the forward’s performance and Friedman doubts it’s a guarantee Schenn will be dealt.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: While Schenn would have considerable trade value, I don’t see the sense in the Flyers moving him, as that would leave a gap in their scoring lines difficult to fill. Yes, they need to shed salary and free up a roster spot, but there’s less painful ways of addressing that.
Despite speculation linking the Boston Bruins with Winnipeg Jets defenseman Dustin Byfuglien, it appears they’re looking at more cost-effective ways to bolster their blueline. There’s no indication that there’s been much discussion regarding a contract extension between Byfuglien and the Jets.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: If the Jets trade Byfuglien, it won’t happen until near the Feb. 29 trade deadline, if at all.
The only way I see the Bruins trading for Buff is if they can get permission to speak to him/his agent about an extension first. Otherwise, they’re just shooting themselves in the foot. Let the kids play, take your lumps this season, but continue working towards a better future. You already traded away heir-apparent Doug Hamilton….why do more damage?
Agree this is a bridge year no reason to give up assets when he can be signed next year for nothing. Bruins are not winning this year time to rid themselves of fading veterans like Kelly,Chara,Eriksson and Siedenberg.
Create cap space for next season.
Without moving out more cap, I seriously doubt that Boston could afford to resign Byfuglien. Next year Boston has about $23 million to sign about 11 players and that’s if the cap doesn’t drop in which is very likely since the canadian dollar is in free fall and Byfuglien could easily command between $6.5-$7.0 million on at least a 5 or 6 year deal. That would leave around $16-$16.5 million for 10 more players seriously doubt that would work unless Sweeny plans on filling out the rest of the roster with ELC players.
I don’t have much faith the Bruins are a playoff team. Therefor if the Jets want to wait till Feb 29th to trade Big Buff then perhaps the Bruins are not a trade distinction at all to be speculated over. I would think that they are more likely to be sellers come Feb 29th and it won’t matter if Winnipeg is selling or buying.
Auto correct victim. My bad spelling creates new words. “Distinction = destination” in above comments. If you try and spell the word by changing the first e to an I it distinctly changes the direction of your thought.
Agree Bruins are gonna be bad and time for a rebuild so moving veterans at the deadline for prospects and picks is the way to go.
Build around Bergeron,Marchand and Krejci these guys still produce and are young enough. Chiarelli messed up this team Seguin and Boychuck were rising stars and were moved for nothing.
And now many are touting him as the genius who will turn Edmonton’s fortunes around.Kinda like Rutherford building that dog’s breakfast in Carolina and now in charge of Pittsburgh’s fortunes. I guess a cup will do that for a reputation but in that regard I always point to Burke and Carlysle in Anaheim and Jay Feaster and Tortorella in Tampa. Nothing’s worked for any of them since their cup wins.
If Boston was in the west I say no playoffs. In the east they have a chance to take one of the final two playoff spots. The forwards are not but not spectacular. The d is a work in progress and Mcquaid is not a first pairing maybe 3rd pairing. The d will be more mobile which will be exciting to watch and the bruins have one of the best goalies in the business. I’m predicting playoff for the bruins.
Agreed cause they are in the east more specifically the Atlantic division, they have a chance. Tampa and Montreal I have confidence in saying they will be in the playoffs.
The 3rd spot likely will be either Detroit, Ottawa, Florida or Boston. That leaves one other team and heck who knows what Buffalo will do. I am thinking though the metropolitan division are taking the two wild card spots. Time will tell.
I cant see the Bs making the playoffs this year that defense is gonna struggle this year it is bad! rask might not look as good playing behind a weaker defense this year
Bigbear, i don’t think the d is going to be as bad as you think. I think Claude will put a system together that will simplify and make it tough, but then again i’m a bruins fan.
Byfuglien – Not even going to talk about him, this rumour has been talked to death the last couple of weeks. Jets aren’t going to trade any of their key players until they’re certain they’ve either missed the playoffs or they can’t be re-signed. Too early to judge either of those things. Enough!
Tinordi and Oleksiak – Not a bad trade proposal, I think Tinordi would be of great benefit to Dallas. That being said, there is one problem with that trade. At the end of the day, both would still have to clear waivers in order to be sent down. Is either team willing to take that risk of sending their newly acquired player down? Is either team willing to keep them as their 7th man for the sake of not losing him? For that reason I don’t see this trade happening but I’ve been wrong before.
If players with no-whatever clauses are exempt from being picked in an expansion draft, then they should be REQUIRED to be on the “protected” list for a team and take one of those spots. Otherwise a team would get extra/free protected players.
That’s pretty much what I would expect to happen. I assume any expansion would be similar to the last rounds of expansion drafts. Anyone with a NC clause is likely going to be protected anyway. You’ll probably have a few ones which teams will leave unprotected with the hopes of dumping the contract, but other than that I can’t see this being a large widespread issue.
Even at the legality of it, I would think the argument that one side could make would be based around the NC clause being an agreement between team and player which in this case is circumvented by a league mandated expansion draft (to me that is like the league overruling the team and moving the contract). I imagine this would be the same sort of process as a relocation team uses when they move. In this case (and please correct me if I am wrong, I haven’t obviously read up on the specifics of each standard NHL contract) it is my estimation that a player signs the NC with the particular team or company and technically did not sign the agreement with the new team, but the contract is transferred between ownership group A and ownership group B via the NHL (or by an action of the NHL) with the rest of the assets. So for expansion, I assume a team could select the player, but then would automatically inherit the contract obligations along with them.
Here is an interesting thought – given that in an expansion there would be a set amount of protected players for each team, because a no movement clause binds a team to not move the player and there is no provisions in the contract or CBA for these situations, (assuming I am wrong on how this all works as mentioned above) could a player legally sue a team for failing to protect them and therefore breaching the NC clause of their contract?
Lyle, that “no movement” scenario when it comes to expansion looks more and more like a can of worms the NHL never really thought through when such clauses were allowed in contracts in the first place. Were they in place when Columbus and Minnesota came into the league in 2000? And if so, how was it handled then? I don’t suppose anyone on the Atlanta Thrashers invoked such a clause when the team moved to Winnipeg in 2011–12 simply because the alternative would have been to remain in Atlanta and work in the private sector.
To the best of my memory, George, no-movement and no-trade clauses weren’t in the CBA during the last round of expansion in the 1990s. I think they were just a generally agreed upon thing between player and management, but they certainly weren’t as prevalent as they are today.
The Thrashers were a relocation, therefore an expansion draft wasn’t needed for the Jets. It as simple as they inherit everything the Thrashers had and they do with it as they please.
What I would like to know is how many players can a team protect in an expansion draft. If the team drafted a player and he hasn’t been signed to a pro contract yet, he is protected from the expansion draft for that reason? Also, are teams obligated to make at least one or two of their best players available so that the expanding team isn’t stuck with a group of third and forth line players?
I realize that re Atlanta, Robert. I said as much. But even so, I’m sure there were players with “no movement” clauses on that team who weren’t thrilled to find themselves on the way to mosquito-heaven.
For the expansion draft teams have two options:
1) They can protect ONE goalie, FIVE defensemen and NINE forwards
OR
2) they can protect TWO goalies, THREE defensemen and SEVEN forwards
I’m not a lawyer but it’s pretty clear that a “no movement” clause means no movement. The contract is signed between the player and the franchise. The team or the league can not simply over-ride that agreement when it’s convenient. I believe the team are going to have to revisit each player with any kind of movement clause and determine whether they are eligible/willing to move. Otherwise they will have to “protect” them.
Yeah, the way I see it is that teams with players that have no movement clauses would have to protect those players, but players with no trade clauses can be left unprotected.
I really hope your not a lawyer lol if the NMC isn’t written into the expansion draft than the NMC is no different from any players contract in the league
nmc is mo movement at all.
Why in the world would Montreal want to trade Eller at this point. The line with Ellrt, Galchenyuk and Semin seems to be really playing well together so that comment makes no sense.
I see what you mean but Bergevin has been trying to trade Eller all last season. It was common knowledge he was available. There were no takers at 3 years for $3.5M each. It would be best for Canadiens to utilize him best they can while his contract slowly expires. Eller could easily be traded halfway into his last contract year if they want to later.
What!?! Put Tinordi on waivers? I have it from an educated source (okay, it’s Big Bear) that Tinordi is future stud defenseman. He said “reminds me of Hedman”. Anybody want a Hedman? Stay tuned to the waiver wire.
lol I said he reminds me of hedman because of his size!! learn to read before responding CO look how long it took hedman to be what they expected
You never know about young players – Habs jumped in front of the Sabres to pick Jarred Tinord, Buffalo picked Mark Pysyk. Pysyk has developed nicely and Tinordi is struggling. What looks good at the time doesn’t always work that way.
Eller is going nowhere, this is a figment of imagination from some “experts”.
First time in his Mtl career he is getting regular-season top 6 minutes, and the line is a treat to watch.
He’s played all the “hard minutes” for the last two years.
Tinordi, only 23, LD, and 6’6″, 5 years into development, is also going nowhere.
Habs are very thin on the farm re LD, with Markov also retiring after next year.
Will be Gilbert or Barberio.
with their goaltending depth maybe its time to move Rask and his $7 mil contract for the next 7 years
Good luck with that. Teams he might want to go to are smack up against the cap and those that can afford him are likely the last places he’d want to go to.