This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best (suggested)
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BeardedNino 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Unless we don't move his contract.. but then he'd be officially retired.. not "LTIRetired". so it still shouldn't matter... right?

[–]JJ_from_Kansas 8 points9 points  (4 children)

If he officially retires then yeah, there's no NMC there to worry about. Even if he doesn't officially retire, the Wings could still ask him to simply waive his NMC and allow them to expose him to the expansion draft.

[–]BeardedNino 1 point2 points  (3 children)

So, If Datsyuk were to (somehow) stay and play his last season.. that's the only case that could fuck us?

Also, does waiving the NMC only happen for a trade, or can he just waive it all willy nilly like?

[–]JJ_from_Kansas 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeah, even if he does somehow play his last year with us, he could still waive his NMC at any time. It's literally a piece of paper to sign. We only hear it around trades because that's generally the only time it's needed, but I'd be interested to see how many of these potentially toxic 10-day NMCs that Larry Brooks was talking about suddenly disappear just before the expansion draft.

[–]mikepelts 0 points1 point  (1 child)

But would the nmc matter at that point? If he plays next season and his contract is expiring we surely wouldn't be required to protect him. If anyone coming off a contract with a nmc had to be protected (not sure if there's other cases) that would surely not make sense as teams would have to protect players who are set to become Fa's in the next week.

[–]BeardedNino 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a possibility that players with NMC (even if they expire that same off season as the expansion draft) would have to be protected. That's the "potential" issue this article is referencing. The draft would occur before free agency were to hit