Down Goes Brown's Grab Bag: The Dumb Rule That Killed PK Subban's No-Trade Clause

(Editor's note: Welcome to Sean McIndoe's Friday grab bag, where he writes on a variety of NHL topics. You can follow him on Twitter.)

There are three annual traditions that happen every year on July 1.

The first is that it's Canada Day, and every Canadian you know lights a whole bunch of Canadian fireworks, which are exactly the same as American fireworks, except that instead of going "BANG" they go "Was that too loud, because if so I'm really sorry."

The second is that NHL free agency begins, with in-depth coverage provided by all of the hockey world's top insiders.

The third is that one minute after the end of the day's coverage, every single hockey insider tweets some variation of "Cottage time!" and we never hear another word from them until September.

Um, guys? This is not OK.

The rest of the hockey world counts on its insiders to keep the news flowing. You're our only link to what's actually happening out there. You can't all just cartwheel out the door at 5:01 on free agency day and expect the rest of us to function. WE NEED YOU.

Honestly, has Kris Russell signed yet? You think he hasn't because you never heard otherwise, but can you be sure? If Russel got a six-year deal from the Hurricanes on Saturday, who would have told you? Me? Let me assure you, I do not know anything. I'm not even completely sure that the season is over until Elliotte Friedman tells me it is.

So from now on, be it resolved that all the hockey insiders have to leave one guy in the office over the summer. I don't care how you pick; create a schedule, play paper-rock-scissors, or let Whyno run one of his rigged draws like he does for the game-winning goal pools. But choose somebody to stay behind and keep the lights on. Some of us are still here, hitting refresh on our twitter feeds every few minutes, and we need to see something other than photos of a glass of wine sitting on a dock in front of a sunset.

Speaking of summer vacations, isn't this whole thing supposed to open with the three stars of comedy section? Well, yeah, during the season that tends to be a nice way to ease into a recap of the week. But over the summer, there's no on-ice action to GIF and every player goes off the grid for two months. So rather than have every week be three random fourth-liners retweeting memes from 2011, I figured we'd give the section an offseason break. Maybe we'll do a three stars of the month instead, or maybe we'll just wait until September. We'll see how it goes.

The good news, which you have noticed tucked away into that last paragraph, is that for the first time in its four-year history, the plan is for the Grab Bag to run through the entire summer. I'm very excited about this. Feel free to check back in a few weeks to find out if this is still the case.

OK, back to the actual content…

P.K. Subban was traded for Shea Weber last week, just 48 hours before his no-trade clause would have kicked in. He's now a Nashville Predator. He's also a guy who doesn't have a no-trade clause anymore, because of a weird NHL rule that doesn't make any sense.

CONFIRMED: — General Fanager (@generalfanager)June 30, 2016

Let's be clear about what's happening here. This is not a case where a player lost his NTC because he agreed to waive it once and now it's gone forever. Lots of fans seem to think that's how the rule works; it's not. Waiving an NTC is a player's choice and can be done at any time, and it still follows him wherever he goes.

No, this is a very specific scenario that only happens in rare cases. According to the CBA, a player cannot have no-trade protection prior to reaching the season in which they'd be eligible for unrestricted free agency. In Subban's case, that was the 2016-17 league year, which is why his NTC was going to come into effect on July 1. But the CBA also says that if a player is traded before the NTC kicks in, the team acquiring him no longer has to honor it unless they choose to. And the Predators have chosen not to.

Nobody's shedding too many tears for Subban, who'll still make millions of dollars on a deal that carries the highest cap hit of any defenseman in the league. But that doesn't make this rule any less ridiculous, arbitrary and unfair. Players negotiate NTCs into their contracts in good faith, in some cases leaving money on the table to get that extra protection. Imagine negotiating a contract with your boss that saw you take less money in exchange for some other consideration that was important to you—better hours, more vacation time, whatever. Then just before your new arrangement starts, you get transferred to another department and they tell you that they won't honor any of that, but you're still stuck with your reduced salary.

Apparently, the logic here is that the team acquiring the player shouldn't be bound by an NTC commitment made by his previous team. But they're already bound by everything else—salary, term, bonus structure, etc.—so this seems like a weirdly specific exception to carve out.

It doesn't come up often, and it was bargained between the NHL and NHLPA, so a rule is a rule. But it's a dumb one. And it's not fair to the players who negotiate a contract in good faith, then lose a piece of it due to an obscure CBA loophole.

[Realizes this rule makes it possible that P.K. Subban could be traded to the Maple Leafs at some point in the next six years.]

Uh, you know what, forget everything I just said. It's a great rule. Good work, NHL!

On Wednesday, the Blue Jackets announced that former London Knights GM Basil McRae had been hired their new director of player personnel. It's a nice step up for McRae, who's carved out a very nice front office career for himself after his playing days ended. Those playing days were pretty fun in their own right, and they earn McRae this week's Obscure Former Player honors.

A fifth-round pick by the Nordiques in 1980, McRae debuted the next year and played two seasons in Quebec. But it was a 1983 trade to the Maple Leafs that really put McRae in his element. That element, of course, was the Norris Division, the craziest place in NHL history. For the better part of a decade, the Norris was that Hanson Brothers debut scene from Slap Shot, except for 60 straight minutes, every single game. It was the home of virtually all of the game's most feared tough guys, often three or four on a team. And it was pure chaos.

And McRae came to symbolize all of it, thanks an impressive feat: Over the course of his career, he managed to play for all five Norris teams, going from Toronto to Detroit to Minnesota to St. Louis to Chicago. He even worked in a stint in Tampa Bay, which was technically part of the division but never really counted. One of the league's most respected tough guys, he took on all of the division's top heavyweights in some classic bouts. McRae topped 300 penalty minutes four times, and led the entire NHL in PIM in 1990.

Oh, and he also found time to be a movie star.

McRae's last season came in 1996-97, his 16th in the league, and embarked on a scouting career before ending up in London. Now he's on to Columbus, presumably to smack some sense into the front office.

Defensieve defenceman (noun)—An NHL defenseman who is primarily recognized for his play without the puck in his own end. These players are best known for their ability to block shots, clear the front of the net, get a stick in the passing lane, and (occasionally) chip the puck off the glass and out.

You see what we did there, right? The concept of the defensive defenseman has been around forever, and for almost all of hockey history it's been a compliment. But recently, the onset of analytics has led some fans to reconsider the way the role is viewed. In an age where we're beginning to appreciate the importance of possession, the classic defensive defenseman starts to look like a liability, because he only gets to be defensive due to his team never having the puck when he's on the ice.

But while forward-thinking fans have adjusted their view, old-school types still love these guys, and that leads to the same tired fights breaking out whenever they're discussed. So I'm proposing that we introduce a new term: "defensieve defenseman." In other words, a defenseman best known for being a variation on that classic hockey insult: a sieve.

It's close enough to the original that it's barely noticeable. It just looks like an innocent typo. But it allows the user to subtly signal that he knows a given player isn't worth the praise being heaped on them, while avoiding having the whole discussion turn into yet another analytics debate.

Here's how it would work:

Old way:

Fan 1: Sure, the Leafs signed Roman Polak, but I was hoping they'd land Kris Russell.

Fan 2: Both of those guys are garbage fires because their relative corsi qualcomp clearly indicates that…

Fan 1: [furiously stabs Fan 2]

Fan 2: [furiously stabs Fan 1]

New way:

Fan 1: Sure, the Leafs signed Roman Polak, but I was hoping they'd land Kris Russell.

Fan 2: Those guys are certainly both among the league's leading defensieve defensemen.

Fan 1: [furiously hugs Fan 2]

Fan 2: [furiously hugs Fan 1]

See? Everyone's happy, and nobody gets stabbed. All thanks to the trusty ol' defensieve defensemen.

So yeah, Subban for Weber. It's been a week since the trade went down, and the hockey world is still debating the deal. Some see it as a clear win for the Predators, who got a Norris winner in his prime in exchange for a declining player with a bad contract. Others insist that the Canadiens got the more complete blueliner, and that Weber makes them a better team for at least the next several years.

If only there were some way that we could settle this debate on the ice, by having two star defenseman go head-to-head in a contrived competition. If only…

• Welcome to the glory that was NHL Showdown. These competitions, produced in partnership with the player's union, were filmed during the offseason and ran as intermission features during the 70s, first on NBC and then later on Hockey Night in Canada. The entire concept, I'm sure I won't have to tell you, was fantastic.

• This particular contest is from 1978, and features an Original Six matchup between Toronto's Borje Salming and Montreal's Guy Lapointe. Our hosts are Brian McFarlane and Larry Robinson, who came to the arena after a quick stop to raid Super Dave Osborne's wardrobe closet.

• Robinson, by the way, is Lapointe's teammate, so you know who he's rooting for. I don't know about you, but I'm so tired of Hockey Night in Canada's well-known anti-Maple Leafs bias.

• Our first event is a race event, which has been cleverly named "The Race Event." It will feature Salming and Lapointe skating and stickhandling in the offensive zone while working their way around what appears to be the current Detroit Red Wings defense corps.

• Hey, Guy, any chance you'd like to use this first event as a chance to enact a metaphor for the 2015-16 Canadiens season?

• Yep, that works.

• This was the first time in Salming's career that he found himself on the ice with a fellow defenseman who couldn't skate three steps without falling down. The second time: Every shift he took in Toronto during the '80s.

• Next up is the accuracy shooting event, which is a lot like the modern-day version we see on all-star weekend, but with a few key differences. First, they make the guys shoot from the far blueline. Second, the targets are rectangles. And third, and most importantly, they're using something called the "Hockey-Mate" to handle the passing.

• Seriously, what the hell is this? Was there nobody available who could pass a puck, and we needed to invent a robot to do it for us? And what happened to these things? Did they perfect the technology over the next decade, throw a uniform on it, and call it Adam Oates? Dammit, now I want a vintage 1978 Hockey-Mate.

• Uh, are we going to mention that Lapointe is shooting from way closer than Salming? No? Fine, I'll pretend I'm not emotionally invested in this if you will. Lapointe cheats wins easily and we're tied.

• Our third and final event is the breakaway contest, and we've been joined by Flyers goaltender Wayne Stephenson, no doubt here to avenge the 1976 Stanley Cup Final. He's sporting that classic '70s goaltender look of plain brown pads and gloves and a completely insane mask. I miss those days.

• Robinson interviews Salming, who gives away his entire strategy, at which point Robinson runs over and tells Stephenson because he's secretly helping Lapointe. That last part may or may not have happened, but I'm like 90 percent sure it did.

• Fun Borje Salming fact: The only reason that Leafs scouts managed to sign him in the first place was because their notoriously bigoted owner, Harold Ballard, was in jail at the time. The Toronto Maple Leafs, everyone!

• Salming gets five attempts and shoots on all five, because this is 1978 and every goaltender is the size of a pygmy marmoset. He scores on the last three, putting all the pressure on Lapointe, which is to say no pressure at all because nobody actually cares who wins these things except me.

• Shout out to the guy behind the net working the goal light, by the way. Wouldn't want there to be any confusion for the (checks ticket sales) zero fans in attendance.

• We get a replay of Salming's goals. You know, you don't hear the phrase "completely bamboozled" enough in hockey coverage these days. OK, besides when the Oilers make a trade.

• Wait, Lapointe has to shoot without knowing what Salming's score is? What's the point of that? Did they make him close his eyes while Salming was shooting? Did they hit him over the head and lock him in the arena boiler room for five minutes? Are we really pretending Robinson didn't just tell him because all Habs are dirty cheaters? I have so many questions right now.

• But seriously, everyone, remember: We can't make the nets two inches bigger, because it would really mess with the history of the game.

• Lapointe scores on two of his first three shots, but Stephenson slams the door on the last two. LEAFS WIN! LEAFS WIN!

• Top five Toronto Maple Leafs highlights during my lifetime: 1) Every Wendel Clark fight. 2) Winning the Auston Matthews lottery. 3) The existence of the Ottawa Senators. 4) Salming beats Lapointe. 5) I can't think of a fifth one.

• Also, Salming apparently wins $7,500. I wonder what Ballard spent it on after he ambled out of his crypt and stole it out of Salming's pocket in the dead of night.

• Epilogue: To this day, as per the rules of NHL Showdown, Guy Lapointe has still never been told that he lost.

Have a question, suggestion, old YouTube clip, or anything else you'd like to see included in this column? Email Sean at

nhlgrabbag@gmail.com

.