Vancouver Canucks 30 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 http://www.teamradio.ca/news/mike-gillis-on-henrik-hamhuis-and-no-trade-clauses/ Vancouver Canucks general manager Mike Gillis says players won’t be asked to waive their no-trade clauses. “It is a fluid business and there are circumstances where a player may choose to move on,” Gillis said on the TEAM 1040. ” Those discussions occur periodically and, no, I haven’t wavered on a basic principle that when we make a deal with somebody that we stick to it, so, no, I’m not wavering. “When I make a deal with somebody and they have requested and are granted a no-trade clause, we respect that. In the event a player came to us and asked if things could be changed, then we’ll listen to it.” However, Gillis says no player with a no-trade clause has come to him and asked to be moved. “When you ask players to sacrifice in terms of dollars, they like some measure of guarantee that their sacrifices will be rewarded. That’s how these clauses come about. “There are circumstances that are fluid. Teams trade players with no-trade clauses all the time. It’s part of doing business under this CBA. It’s part of trying to assemble a team and keeping it together. You have to make decisions on people that you believe are long-term people for your hockey club and that’s what we’ve done.” Daniel and Henrik Sedin both have no-movement clauses. Ryan Kesler, Alexandre Burrows, Alexander Edler, Jason Garrison, Kevin Bieksa, and Dan Hamhuis all have no-trade clauses, while Chris Higgins has a limited no-trade clause. It is fair to say all those players took below market value in exchange for the security of a no-trade or no-movement clause and to be part of a winning Canucks team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJDDawg Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Where have you been. This along with your other thread is currently being discussed in multiple threads. Stop posting old news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Redundant and misleading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucklehead73 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 So what's the difference between a no movement or no trade clause? That just mean we can't bury the sedins in the minors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.