Dylan Larkinโs trade request has already created one of the strangest situations the Detroit Red Wings have faced in years. Now NHL commissioner Gary Bettman is questioning the very type of player leverage that has helped make the situation so complicated.
Bettman did not single out Larkin, or any individual player, by name Thursday, but the Red Wings center is one of the prominent examples surrounding the conversation. Larkin requested a trade despite having multiple years remaining on his contract, while his no-trade protection gives him considerable control over where Detroit can actually send him.

Gary Bettman Questions How No-Trade Clauses Are Being Used
No-trade and no-movement clauses were originally designed to give players security after signing long-term contracts. Bettman believes the NHL may now be entering different territory when players use those protections while simultaneously requesting to leave.
โAs I look at whatโs happened or is happening now, I donโt think thatโs a good thing,โ Bettman said on Sportsnet 590โs FAN Hockey Show. He added that the trend may not be good for players, teams or the fans emotionally invested in those teams.
That distinction matters enormously in Larkinโs case. His contract gives him every right to control potential destinations, but combining that protection with a trade request leaves Detroit trying to satisfy two objectives that do not necessarily work together.
The Red Wings need to receive enough value to justify moving their No. 1 center. Larkin, meanwhile, can significantly reduce Detroitโs options by deciding which teams he is willing to join.
Dylan Larkin Is a Perfect Example of Detroitโs Problem
Former general manager Steve Yzerman confirmed in June that Larkinโs agent requested a trade shortly after Detroitโs season ended. Yzerman also revealed that Larkinโs camp provided a โshort list of teamsโ to which he would consider waiving his trade protection.
That list appears to have grown since then. Recent reporting from NHL insider Elliotte Friedman indicated that Larkin may be willing to consider roughly eight teams, giving interim general manager Shawn Horcoff more potential trade partners than Detroit appeared to have earlier in the offseason.
More options do not automatically produce a good trade, however. Any team negotiating with Detroit knows Larkin has significant control over the process, which can make it more difficult for the Red Wings to create a true bidding war.
That becomes especially important because Detroit reportedly isnโt looking to simply collect futures. The Red Wingsโ reported asking price centers around acquiring a younger impact center, an extremely difficult asset for another organization to surrender.
Bettmanโs Comments Highlight a Bigger NHL Issue
Larkin isnโt alone in creating this type of situation, which is why Bettmanโs comments extend well beyond Detroit. Other prominent NHL stars have also requested moves while possessing contractual protections that allow them to influence or control their destination.
Bettman indicated the league isnโt ready to declare one offseason a systemic problem. He did, however, leave open the possibility that the NHL could eventually discuss the issue with the NHL Playersโ Association if the trend continues.
That would create an interesting debate because players negotiated for those protections and have every contractual right to use them. Teams, on the other hand, could argue that the original purpose was to provide stability rather than allow a player to request a trade and then heavily dictate the terms of his departure.
Larkinโs situation shows exactly why that tension matters. Detroit cannot simply trade him to the highest bidder, while Larkin cannot force the Red Wings to accept a return they consider inadequate.
That leaves both sides stuck in the middle.
The Red Wings still have one of their most important players under contract, but they also have a former captain who has publicly acknowledged asking to leave. Bettmanโs latest comments wonโt resolve that standoff, but they make clear that the league office is paying attention to the larger trend that helped create it.







2 Responses
There should be a clause. If the team decides to trade the player, the player has control over which teams he goes to. If the player requests to be traded, the team has control over where the player goes, hence to the highest bidder.
I agree totally. I was thinking the same thing.