[Speculation] Canucks exploring Tyler Myers trade

[Alflives]

8 minutes ago, mll said:

Not really an issue if they really wanted to move him.  It's an NTC -  they can just waive him and have an agreement where that team picks him off waivers.

 

It's apparently how Tampa got McDonagh to waive per Kyprios.  They apparently had an agreement with CBJ that if they couldn't find another trade that they'll waive him with CBJ then picking him up.

True, but can’t retain in that situation, so the team taking on Myers is stuck with that full contract.  Although that could be good too in that no other team would put in a claim.  

[mll]

19 minutes ago, JM_ said:

can a player be put on waivers at any time during the offseason for a move like this? 

As far as I know there's no restriction in off-season waivers.

 

The Wild put a player on waivers in the middle of summer a few years ago (was still under Fletcher) - they didn't like his contract demands and wanted to show him that no one would pick him up.  No one did and then signed a more reasonable deal.

 

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, mll said:

As far as I know there's no restriction in off-season waivers.

 

The Wild put a player on waivers in the middle of summer a few years ago (was still under Fletcher) - they didn't like his contract demands and wanted to show him that no one would pick him up.  No one did and then signed a more reasonable deal.

 

its a hard way to treat a player.... Myers hasn't done anything to warrant it. But it is an option. 

[wai_lai416]

16 hours ago, mll said:

As far as I know there's no restriction in off-season waivers.

 

The Wild put a player on waivers in the middle of summer a few years ago (was still under Fletcher) - they didn't like his contract demands and wanted to show him that no one would pick him up.  No one did and then signed a more reasonable deal.

 

Every decent player that consider signing in Vancouver will be asking for a full nmc if that’s the case to even consider signing or re-signing in Vancouver if that’s how they ended up treating Myers 

[coryberg]

On 7/25/2022 at 2:15 PM, Jester13 said:

Rumour has it that Myers refused to waive not long ago, so offloading him will be pretty tough. 

As of July 1, 2022 Myers had to submit a 10 team no trade list. Therefore we have 21 options without having to get his permission.

[VegasCanuck]

9 minutes ago, coryberg said:

As of July 1, 2022 Myers had to submit a 10 team no trade list. Therefore we have 21 options without having to get his permission.

Yes, but was he asked to submit one? 

[AK_19]

2 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Yes, but was he asked to submit one? 

If he doesn't submit one, then the NTC list is void. This happened to a player in St Louis who got traded to Buffalo.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Yes, but was he asked to submit one? 

Don’t all players, with modified NTC’s, have to submit their lists to their clubs y a certain date.  I think the agents have the records proving submission.  That’s why that Dadanov Trade last year got nixed by the league, no? 

[VegasCanuck]

4 minutes ago, AK_19 said:

If he doesn't submit one, then the NTC list is void. This happened to a player in St Louis who got traded to Buffalo.

I believe the structure of the contract and clause though, is only if the team asks for a list. If they ask and he refuses to provide one, then it would be null and void. I believe the team must ask for a list though for enforcement to kick in, it's a team option.

[VegasCanuck]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Don’t all players, with modified NTC’s, have to submit their lists to their clubs y a certain date.  I think the agents have the records proving submission.  That’s why that Dadanov Trade last year got nixed by the league, no? 

Again, I believe it is only if they are being asked to waive. A list of teams that a player may be willing to accept trade to, may change over the course of a year. I believe the team must ask for a current list if they are shopping him.

[AK_19]

2 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

I believe the structure of the contract and clause though, is only if the team asks for a list. If they ask and he refuses to provide one, then it would be null and void. I believe the team must ask for a list though for enforcement to kick in, it's a team option.

Agree to disagree then. It seems pretty clear based on past situations with Patrik Berglund, Dadanov, and the fact that many players with NTCs get shocked when they are traded (Fleury, Huberdeau) that it's more of a standard clause in the contract. There is a deadline for when they have to submit the list every year, they don't need to be formally requested. Even if it wasn't, it would be extremely negligent of a GM to not maximize potential trade options by forgetting to ask what was owed to the team. 

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Again, I believe it is only if they are being asked to waive. A list of teams that a player may be willing to accept trade to, may change over the course of a year. I believe the team must ask for a current list if they are shopping him.

Maybe?  But I think it’s submitted July 1st, and then that’s the list for that calendar year.  @mll help please.

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, AK_19 said:

Agree to disagree then. It seems pretty clear based on past situations with Patrik Berglund, Dadanov, and the fact that many players with NTCs get shocked when they are traded (Fleury, Huberdeau) that it's more of a standard clause in the contract. There is a deadline for when they have to submit the list every year, they don't need to be formally requested. Even if it wasn't, it would be extremely negligent of a GM to not maximize potential trade options by forgetting to ask what was owed to the team. 

Okay, I have a lot of experience in corporate law, but I have zero experience in NHL laws around No Trade Clauses, so I found this on CapFriendly. I didn't realize that a player must be 27 to be eligible for a NTC.

 

Here's a breakdown:

A limited, or modified no-trade clause (M-NTC) is less restrictive than a full no-trade clause (NTC), and can be added to a player's contract in the years after they are eligible for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency (7 Accrued seasons or 27 years of age), and has the following properties:

• The player's contract includes specific terms in respect to being traded without their consent where the player must:
  • In a specified timeframe or window:
    • Specify a pre-determined number of teams the player would be willing to be traded to, or:
    • Specify a pre-determined number of teams the player would not be willing to be traded to
• Consent is not required to be placed on waivers
• Consent is not required for assignment to the minors
• Player is not exempt from a buyout or contract termination
• Once the clause has gone into effect, it can travel with the player even if he consents to being traded or is claimed on waivers
  • This requires that the acquiring team sign an addendum to the contract ensuring that the clause does in fact travel with the player (written by the player's agent)
  • If the acquiring team refuses to sign the addendum, and the player waives his clause anyway, at that point the clause may be nullified
• In prior CBA’s (2005, 2013) if the player was traded before the clause took effect, the acquiring team could opt to void the clause. However, as of July 2020, and under the new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), all No-Move and No-Trade clauses included in the players active contract shall continue to remain active and travel with the player even in the event that the SPC is moved (either by trade, waivers claim, or loan to another league) regardless of whether or not the clause has taken effect.

Example: Modified No-Trade Clause: Within 48 hours of request, the player must submit a list of 18 teams they are willing to be traded to without consent. If the list is not received within 48 hours, the player can be traded to any team without consent.

 

So, a player is not required to lead a clause in effect all season, they are required to submit within 48 hours. If they miss that deadline then I believe that would deem the clause null and void.

 

 

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Maybe?  But I think it’s submitted July 1st, and then that’s the list for that calendar year.  @mll help please.

See my last post, @Alflives

 

[DeNiro]

I could think of quite a few teams Myers would be an upgrade for. With two years left he’s not that much of a risk.

 

If Guddy is worth 4 Myers is worth 6.

[cripplereh]

Maybe that is part of the hold up another team trying to make cap room to acquire Myers,then the domino's will fall for us trading him and Miller plus whatever else we might do

Edited July 28, 2022 by cripplereh

[aGENT]

51 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I could think of quite a few teams Myers would be an upgrade for. With two years left he’s not that much of a risk.

 

If Guddy is worth 4 Myers is worth 6.

Yup, I think it's hilarious some folk still think we'd have to pay to move him  Only 2 years term left for a 2nd paird, RHD with size, who can skate and put up complimentary offense.... Not hard at all to move.

 

The harder part is finding/acquiring the better fitting, ideally younger guy to replace him.

[AK_19]

1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said:

Okay, I have a lot of experience in corporate law, but I have zero experience in NHL laws around No Trade Clauses, so I found this on CapFriendly. I didn't realize that a player must be 27 to be eligible for a NTC.

 

Here's a breakdown:

A limited, or modified no-trade clause (M-NTC) is less restrictive than a full no-trade clause (NTC), and can be added to a player's contract in the years after they are eligible for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency (7 Accrued seasons or 27 years of age), and has the following properties:

• The player's contract includes specific terms in respect to being traded without their consent where the player must:
  • In a specified timeframe or window:
    • Specify a pre-determined number of teams the player would be willing to be traded to, or:
    • Specify a pre-determined number of teams the player would not be willing to be traded to
• Consent is not required to be placed on waivers
• Consent is not required for assignment to the minors
• Player is not exempt from a buyout or contract termination
• Once the clause has gone into effect, it can travel with the player even if he consents to being traded or is claimed on waivers
  • This requires that the acquiring team sign an addendum to the contract ensuring that the clause does in fact travel with the player (written by the player's agent)
  • If the acquiring team refuses to sign the addendum, and the player waives his clause anyway, at that point the clause may be nullified
• In prior CBA’s (2005, 2013) if the player was traded before the clause took effect, the acquiring team could opt to void the clause. However, as of July 2020, and under the new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), all No-Move and No-Trade clauses included in the players active contract shall continue to remain active and travel with the player even in the event that the SPC is moved (either by trade, waivers claim, or loan to another league) regardless of whether or not the clause has taken effect.

Example: Modified No-Trade Clause: Within 48 hours of request, the player must submit a list of 18 teams they are willing to be traded to without consent. If the list is not received within 48 hours, the player can be traded to any team without consent.

 

So, a player is not required to lead a clause in effect all season, they are required to submit within 48 hours. If they miss that deadline then I believe that would deem the clause null and void.

 

 

I'm not sure there's anything being said there (outside of their example) that is saying anything different than what either of us proposed. Then again, my experience is even less useful in criminal and immigration law. 

[Chris12345]

1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said:

Okay, I have a lot of experience in corporate law, but I have zero experience in NHL laws around No Trade Clauses, so I found this on CapFriendly. I didn't realize that a player must be 27 to be eligible for a NTC.

 

Here's a breakdown:

A limited, or modified no-trade clause (M-NTC) is less restrictive than a full no-trade clause (NTC), and can be added to a player's contract in the years after they are eligible for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency (7 Accrued seasons or 27 years of age), and has the following properties:

• The player's contract includes specific terms in respect to being traded without their consent where the player must:
  • In a specified timeframe or window:
    • Specify a pre-determined number of teams the player would be willing to be traded to, or:
    • Specify a pre-determined number of teams the player would not be willing to be traded to
• Consent is not required to be placed on waivers
• Consent is not required for assignment to the minors
• Player is not exempt from a buyout or contract termination
• Once the clause has gone into effect, it can travel with the player even if he consents to being traded or is claimed on waivers
  • This requires that the acquiring team sign an addendum to the contract ensuring that the clause does in fact travel with the player (written by the player's agent)
  • If the acquiring team refuses to sign the addendum, and the player waives his clause anyway, at that point the clause may be nullified
• In prior CBA’s (2005, 2013) if the player was traded before the clause took effect, the acquiring team could opt to void the clause. However, as of July 2020, and under the new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), all No-Move and No-Trade clauses included in the players active contract shall continue to remain active and travel with the player even in the event that the SPC is moved (either by trade, waivers claim, or loan to another league) regardless of whether or not the clause has taken effect.

Example: Modified No-Trade Clause: Within 48 hours of request, the player must submit a list of 18 teams they are willing to be traded to without consent. If the list is not received within 48 hours, the player can be traded to any team without consent.

 

So, a player is not required to lead a clause in effect all season, they are required to submit within 48 hours. If they miss that deadline then I believe that would deem the clause null and void.

 

 

Sale of goods ACT, section 18 a?

[VegasCanuck]

9 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

Sale of goods ACT, section 18 a?

Right, the all purchases are final, no refunds or exchanges clause....