NHL Hockey Thread

[Guynemer]

Interesting trade:

Edmonton receives Roloson
Minnesota receives a first round draft pick

Not sure I understand this one from the Oilers' perspective. Roloson is a good goalie, but he's a free agent this post-season and he's not the kind of guy you rent at the deadline for a playoff run. If they do resign him, they have to give Minnesota another third round draft pick.

[KrazyHorse]

If they do resign him, they have to give Minnesota another third round draft pick.

Errr...why?

[Guynemer]

Not sure. That's what I read at ESPN.com... condition of the trade, apparently.

[KrazyHorse]

That's weird. How does it hurt the Wild if Edmonton lets Roloson go free agent after this season?

[Ninot]

No no no, Edmonton only sends Wild a 3rd rounder if Edmonton signs him, not if they don't sign him.

[KrazyHorse]

Even weirder. Unless the Wild has an option on Roloson's contract and is retaining that option, with an option in the trade for Edmonton to buy out the Wild's option on Roloson for 3rd round pick

[KrazyHorse]

By the way, I read "resign" as in "quit" instead of "re-sign" as in "sign again".

That's where the previous mixup was coming from

[Guynemer]

Sorry, I should've been more precise.

Anyway, I still don't understand this trade from Edmonton's perspective. I don't see Roloson taking them through a long playoff run; they just pissed away a high draft pick, maybe two.

[KrazyHorse]

No problem. I'm still confused though. What a weird ****ing condition.

[KrazyHorse]

"I'll sublet my apartment to you for X$ for the next six months. If you decide to start a new lease with the landlady you have to send me another thousand dollars though"

WTF? Is that even legal?

EDIT: somebody should point out to the NHLPA that such contract conditions have the side effect of devaluing an otherwise free agent's worth. I'm pretty sure that such a clause would be illegal in the regular world...

[notyoueither]

The player isn't worth as much to Edmonton if he only stays til the end of the season.

Minn is saying Roloson is good enough that the Oil will want to keep him, and are willing make part of the trade conditional on that happening.

It's not too uncommon that trades or sales have part of the price conditional on the player working out at the new club/team.

[KrazyHorse]

Yeah, but what about how this affects Roloson?

His free market value just dropped because one of the teams who were going to be interested in him anyway (Edmonton) now has to pay a surcharge to Minnesota to re-sign Roloson. Is this sort of thing specifically allowed under the CBA?

[Ninot]

I assume it is if they did it?

[KrazyHorse]

You never know. The fact that this is a bad thing for them might not have crossed through the minds of the NHLPA. They are hockey players, after all...

[Hot Mustard]

Colorado and Montreal just swapped Theodore and Aebischer!