Brick Tamland Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 To get some of these guys to sign here? What if all these contracts would only be signed with the ntcs because the players didn't really want to play here (travel,taxes, real estate costs etc) except with the NTC? Could TL and JB be in trouble or does their cache and some cap space make it easier on them? I am worried that guys like Garrison and Higgy would have rather played elsewhere save for the NTC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Well everyone seems to want to play for the NYR and I can assume the taxes and cost of living is a lot more in New York than Vancouver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Well it's just a piece to the puzzle. Just common sense assumption, it's fair to say they were given NTC's to be given a blanket of security, assurance that they'll be here and which possibly led to them signing for cheaper than market value. However a new Pres and GM changes the ballgame as they are no longer responsible for handing the NTC's out and makes it easier to talk to for players to waive and what not since they don't have the blood on their hands to handle. Also most cases players waive their NTC's when asked anyways so it's not that big of a deal. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrChill Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 To get some of these guys to sign here? What if all these contracts would only be signed with the ntcs because the players didn't really want to play here (travel,taxes, real estate costs etc) except with the NTC? Could TL and JB be in trouble or does their cache and some cap space make it easier on them? I am worried that guys like Garrison and Higgy would have rather played elsewhere save for the NTC Garrison who turned down more money, to play for his hometown? NTC are a bargaining chip just like salary and term, just gives the player a say in where they work. Not a big deal if u ask me. People on CDC make the biggest deal. Lots of teams have them and in similar number to the canucks. Our a is at the higher number of NTC don't get me wrong. Key was that mike said he wouldn't ask someone to waive there NTC. That was the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 ^bingo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I've always had the impression that the N.T.C. was security which MG leveraged during his time primarily to lower the A.A.V. for signing his key players, as well as for UFA's. Given how competitive the team had been consistently prior to last season, I think players would've wanted to sign here regardless, though it would likely have been for higher $$$ figures or term had the N.T.C. not been included. Of course, it has to be factored in that the players don't want to get moved out of the blue without having some say in the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiggs50 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I still don't get how Garrison the home town boy got 4.6 per. He deserved 4 at max and he was almost 100% signing with the nucks. Anyway yeah guys like Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler, Kes, Sedins all deserved their no trade clauses. Guys like Higgins and Hansen not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I think the whole point is MG did not seem comfortable in the trade arena. The opposite to that is a GM who feels confident in his ability to always find the type of player he wants, be able to trade for him without getting fleeced and at a cost that fits his club's cap. I hope this is the type of GM Linden hires. In that case I really don't think more than 3 or 4 NTC's is required. MG seemed to have a lot of good skills/qualities for me but sadly he lacked the most important ones and it was too easy imo to see he had been an agent in his previous occupation. He seemed uncomfortable making big decisions and appeared, to me at least, to lack fluidity and adaptability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 To get some of these guys to sign here? What if all these contracts would only be signed with the ntcs because the players didn't really want to play here (travel,taxes, real estate costs etc) except with the NTC? Could TL and JB be in trouble or does their cache and some cap space make it easier on them? I am worried that guys like Garrison and Higgy would have rather played elsewhere save for the NTC If that were the case, then they'd happily waive? Think about it... But if they actually wanted an NTC and to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 premise of the thread makes no sense. i don't want to play here so the only way i'll sign is if you give me a guarantee that i won't be forced to leave. hmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 To get some of these guys to sign here? What if all these contracts would only be signed with the ntcs because the players didn't really want to play here (travel,taxes, real estate costs etc) except with the NTC? Could TL and JB be in trouble or does their cache and some cap space make it easier on them? I am worried that guys like Garrison and Higgy would have rather played elsewhere save for the NTC As I see it, a player gets a NTC because he wants to be in a particular city. Why does he want to be in a particular city? I see there being two conditions: 1.) Career reasons. The team is getting near to being, currently is, or is still close to being a Cup winning team. The player wants to be a part of this, and is unwilling to risk being traded away from a team which is close to winning a Cup. He is willing to take less to hopefully ensure his chance at a Cup, and also allow the team some cap flexibility, which helps the team's chances. When the NTC's which the Canucks have were signed, this condition applied. If a player signed here solely (or mostly) for first condition reasons, then there may be some chance that he will be agreeable to a move for career reasons. 2.) Personal reasons. The player wants to play in his "hometown", or he has family reasons. Or maybe he just likes the city. Or, the player just likes playing in a particular city, for a particular team, for a certain GM/coach. Or he just likes his team mates. I think this condition applies to the all of Canuck players who received a NTC. The guys with NTC's wanted to sign here.. They had bought in to this team (for whatever reason), and they were willing to take less to stay here, and to hopefully improve the team's chances of success. They got a NTC in exchange for security and for supplying some cap flexibility to the team. This also helps all concerned for condition #1 reasons. If a player signed here for mostly second condition reasons, then there's likely a smaller chance of them being interested in moving on. While having new management may give the team some "moral flexibility" to ask certain players if they would be willing to waive, there is no certainty that the players will comply. regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 If Gillis didn't hand out so many NTCs we would probably be without a couple of our current complacent players. We would have the ability to make trades with any team who showed interest in Canuck players, and would have younger players pushing the veterans for roster spots possibly making said veterans less complacent. I hope Benning feels negatively about NTCs, maybe then we'll have a better shot of winning more than 1 playoff game over the next three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 premise of the thread makes no sense. i don't want to play here so the only way i'll sign is if you give me a guarantee that i won't be forced to leave. hmm. I know. He is also suggested that because the player doesn't want to play here, he will take less then market value for his services. "Why would I sign in Vancouver? I hate that city. What? You're saying I can play in a place I don't want to, as long as I sign a NTC and also get paid less money? Well, that changes things." Logic fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgerKing Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 To get some of these guys to sign here? What if all these contracts would only be signed with the ntcs because the players didn't really want to play here (travel,taxes, real estate costs etc) except with the NTC? Could TL and JB be in trouble or does their cache and some cap space make it easier on them? I am worried that guys like Garrison and Higgy would have rather played elsewhere save for the NTC That's the case everywhere, NYR and Tor are amoung the most desirable places for free agents, all their top salary guys have NTCs. It's not something exclusive to Van. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snucks Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 That is why they need Iron Mike as coach. He will make the players so uncomfortable they will waive the no-trade clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zedlee Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Every team has NTC's, because the agents know that teams will give them.On a team that is on an upswing and challenging for the Cup, NTC's are no problem. For a team in re-build mode...like the Canucks are now...they can be a real problem. Will be most interesting to see how Jim Benning handles all these contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Well everyone seems to want to play for the NYR and I can assume the taxes and cost of living is a lot more in New York than Vancouver. In New York, $100,000/yr minimum if you don't want a roach infested studio. $3,000/mo for an Eastside/ Westside studio. Real estate is very normal. Rent is atrocious. But what you can do in New York is infinitely more than anything Vancouver offers. So the cost of living is relative to amenities in New York, while Vancouver cost of living drastically outweighs what Vancouver offers as a lifestyle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I've come to the conclusion that pretty much everyone here doesn't know how an NTC works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 To get some of these guys to sign here? What if all these contracts would only be signed with the ntcs because the players didn't really want to play here (travel,taxes, real estate costs etc) except with the NTC? Could TL and JB be in trouble or does their cache and some cap space make it easier on them? I am worried that guys like Garrison and Higgy would have rather played elsewhere save for the NTC Gillis was walked on by everyone in the league; front office, GMs, owners, coaches (AV: "I make the decisions"), in trades, and by the players. Player agent's country club mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 premise of the thread makes no sense. i don't want to play here so the only way i'll sign is if you give me a guarantee that i won't be forced to leave. hmm. I hate this place. But I'll play here if you give me less money and a NTC so you can't trade me from the team I'm not motivated to play for. - Said no one ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.