This comes from the CapFriendly FAQ section on the CBA, and applies to NMCs and NTCs:
- The clause 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
- If the player is traded before the clause takes effect, the acquiring team can opt to void the clause
Seems to me that the issue is with the last bullet point - specifically, whether or not Dadonov's M-NTC was in effect prior to being traded to Vegas by Ottawa. If it was, there may also be an issue with the first bullet point - did Dadonov and Vegas sign an addendum stating that his M-NTC would carry over? I'm not an expert in this, so I might be wrong, but this is how I see it. Will be interesting to see how it plays out as this may set a precedence for the league going forward.
Hope this helps!
That is helpful. Thanks.
Looking at Dadonov’s contract details, CapFriendly says the no-trade clause applied to all three years of the contract, so the clause was in effect when he was traded to Vegas. That rules out the last bullet point and takes us to the first point. The question is what happened, or what should have happened, when he became Vegas property. It sounds like Vegas would have had to sign the addendum for his no-trade clause to continue to apply. I don’t know if they signed it, but you’d think they’d know if they did, so let’s assume they didn’t. In that case, it’s not clear to me from this FAQ what would happen. It says, “if the acquiring team refuses to sign the addendum, and the player waives his clause anyway, at that point the clause may be nullified.” However, if Vegas wasn’t on Dadonov’s no-trade list, he could have been traded without waiving the clause – Ottawa did not need his consent to trade him to a team that wasn’t on the no-trade list. So if he didn’t waive the clause, does that mean it wouldn’t be nullified even if Vegas never signed the addendum?
I just noticed that CapFriendly is now showing Dadonov back on Vegas, so I guess the trade has been nullified. That must mean that Dadonov’s no-trade clause was still in effect, and Anaheim was on his no-trade list. I guess either Vegas forgot they signed the addendum, or they didn’t sign it, but the answer to the question in the last sentence of the paragraph above is yes, and Vegas didn’t know that the clause would still be in effect if he didn’t have to waive it to be traded from Ottawa to Vegas. (I’m giving them the benefit of a doubt and assuming this was an honest mistake, and not a deliberate attempt to try to trade a player to a team on his no-trade list.)
As my high school physics teacher used to say, now that you’re thoroughly confused, carry on.