While reading the New York Post today, I finally learned the special clause Wade Redden has in his contract.
Before signing the six-year, $39-million deal Redden had asked Sather for a no-trade clause, something that the stubborn old GM very rarely does.
Sather told Redden he would not grant him a no-trade clause, but he would let Redden submit a list of teams to him that Redden would want to go to if the occasion to trade him ever arises. It was after this that Redden finally signed the contract and became a New York Ranger.
Today's Must Reads
It was after finding this out that Larry Brooks offered this tongue-in-cheek comment that went something along the lines of, "Atlanta was not on his list, so if Waddell wants to trade Kovalchuk, the Rangers won't be able to send Redden there for him."
It's nice that a player wanted to come here so badly that he demanded a no-trade clause for a long-term contract, but hats off to Glen Sather for not giving in, just in case Redden turns out to be a fluke.
Please excuse the shortness of my last few Rangers articles, but because news has been very slow, the reporting has had to be done one event at a time.
comments (12) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
I agree, good move on Slats par there.
Ovie has one of these too with Washington. I think, after most of the league watch the Maple Leafs fail to peddle their big ticket NTC contracts, a lot of GM's will lean this way as the new NTC. A select list type thing.
Good article as always Greg and I hear ya, it's even pretty slow in Toronto. And if the news is slow in NY and Toronto, damn it's slow!
from about 1 month ago
Pretty slow in Ottawa too haha
about 1 month ago
yes great job to both of them, this is a good contract for both sides
from about 1 month ago
If Redden can bounce back after last year then yes it is but Redden has to earn that $6.5 a year and the right to be able to submit that list of teams. If he doesn't earn it on the ice then he is worthless and the signing was useless. I am hoping that is not the case but we will have to wait and see what Redden does on the ice to call this a good signing or not.
about 1 month ago
Giving Redden any kind of movement restricting clause is a mistake, just ask Sens fans.
But hey, good luck.
about 1 month ago
This entire Redden subject can be summed up this way...another major mistake by an over the hill Sather...this player has been given too much money and too many years. Another ridiculous deal that the 'brains" at MSG will long regret.
about 1 month ago
People just have to complain, IMO. If the rangers re-signed Malik everyone would have been like, "Oh Damnit! We should have signed Redden."
Can't please everyone, but atleast he's trying.
about 1 month ago
just because this contract could very well be his last contract doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to a no trade clause. Redden has gone through so much stress and dissapointment in the last 2 years, whos to blame him that he wants to finish his career in New York. What is the point of getting traded in his last year in the NHL? After losing his mother everything went down hill form there, and i don't think it is right that you say all these things when you dont know what REALLY is going on. Redden is 31 and just signed a 6 year contract, which means he will be 37 when the contract is ''suppose'' to come up and he will probaby retire. He has only ever played with Ottawa and the rangers can't excpet that he will be the best Defencemen on the rangers the first season. it is all a learing excperience and the have to give him some slack to get use to a new system and a new defence pairing.
about 1 month ago
just because this contract could very well be his last contract doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to a no trade clause. Redden has gone through so much stress and dissapointment in the last 2 years, whos to blame him that he wants to finish his career in New York. What is the point of getting traded in his last year in the NHL? After losing his mother everything went down hill form there, and i don't think it is right that you say all these things when you dont know what REALLY is going on. Redden is 31 and just signed a 6 year contract, which means he will be 37 when the contract is ''suppose'' to come up and he will probaby retire. He has only ever played with Ottawa and the rangers can't excpet that he will be the best Defencemen on the rangers the first season. it is all a learing excperience and the have to give him some slack to get use to a new system and a new defence pairing.
about 1 month ago
although i completely disagree with the length of the contract, a compromise like what sather did was a good move. it's not like Atlanta would offer kovy for redden anyways.
about 1 month ago
...
about 1 month ago
Why would you disagree with the length? These next 6 years are probably his last 6 years and i think that New York appreciates that. It will probably take him a season to get use to it so say they sign him a 2 year deal and he has an okay first season but and AMAZING second season they will probably resign him with a longer contract. So all they are doing is eliminating STRESS.
write a new comment