 |
| Lubomir Visnosvky thinks his no-trade clause is still valid (Getty Images) |
According to a report from Newsday's Arthur Staple on Monday morning, veteran defenseman Lubomir Visnovsky has filed a grievance in an effort to void his trade to the New York Islanders.
Lubomir Visnovsky has filed a grievance through the NHLPA to void his trade to #Isles, claiming his no-trade clause is still valid.
— Arthur Staple (@StapeNewsday) July 23, 2012
The Islanders, looking to add a veteran to their blue line over the summer, completed a deal during the NHL Draft to acquire Visnovsky from the Anaheim Ducks in exchange for a second-round draft pick.
It seemed like a solid deal for New York at the time as it gave the team a quality defenseman that, even though he was coming off a down year, was just one year removed from being one of the top point producing blue liners in the entire league. And given the state of the Islanders defense it was sure to be an upgrade for this season.
He still has one-year remaining on his contract that pays him $5.6 million.
Staple goes on to explain that Visnovsky's contract with Edmonton had a no-trade clause that he did not invoke when he was traded from the Oilers to Anaheim during the 2010 season. He believes that clause is still valid, and an arbitrator will not determine whether or not it is.
If it's ruled that he can still veto a trade at this point he will remain with the Ducks. If not?
Well, he's still an Islander whether he likes it or not.
Shortly after the trade was completed there was some concern that Visnovsky may not be interested in joining the Islanders. Kevin Schultz from Islanders Point Blank pointed out an interview that Visnovsky had done with a Slovakian website where the KHL was discussed as an option. When speaking with the New York media, however, he told Staple that he was ready to come to camp and play and that "this is my first choice, to play for the Islanders."
Just a little over a month later that no longer appears to be the case.
The fact it took this long for this to become an issue is a bit odd. If Visnovsky felt his no-trade clause was still valid why didn't he simply try to stop the move a month ago when it actually happened?
For more hockey news, rumors and analysis, follow @EyeOnHockey and @agretz on Twitter and like us on Facebook.
