Trade Protection Data (League Wide)
- This is inspired by The Hockey Guy; he brought up a great point about these clauses hurting trade markets.
- Data is from Puckpedia and is only for 2026 (if clauses kick in later, they are not counted).
- Data only covers contracts currently known on Puckpedia.
- There is a chance I've flubbed something, so use this as a trend, not hard counts.
Clause Breakdown
43.2% of all players have some form of movement clause.
| Clause Type | Count | % of Players |
|---|---|---|
| None | 407 | 56.8% |
| M-NTC | 137 | 19.1% |
| NMC | 121 | 16.9% |
| NTC | 51 | 7.1% |
Age & Cap Impact
Older players who have bigger contracts are more likely to get a NMC
| Clause | Avg Age | Avg Cap % |
|---|---|---|
| NMC | 31.4 | 8.52% |
| NTC | 31.1 | 5.69% |
| M-NTC | 31.1 | 5.74% |
Breakdown by Position
When it comes to positions, Right Wingers seem to not get clauses as often, interesting data quirk. This even more odd when you realize that RW tends to get about 6 pts more on avg than LW
| POS | % With Clause |
|---|---|
| D | 46.4% |
| LW | 45.4% |
| G | 45.1% |
| C | 40.8% |
| RW | 37.5% |
Breakdown by Contract Length
Once a contract goes beyond 3 years they almost always have trade protection of some kind, and 2-year deals are the least likely to have any protection.
| Length (Years) | % With Clause |
|---|---|
| 1 | 20.0% |
| 2 | 11.3% |
| 3 | 23.7% |
| 4 | 64.4% |
| 5 | 67.2% |
| 6 | 67.3% |
| 7 | 73.9% |
| 8 | 83.9% |
What does a full NMC look like?
On average, a full NMC contract is going to players with:
Roughly 50+ points
Over 8.5% of the salary cap
More than 6-year contracts
Signing as a UFA (80% of clauses go to UFAs vs 20% to RFAs/RFA-Arb)
Toronto has the most total clauses (15)
Florida leads in NMCs specifically (11)
Where a player was drafted has very little to do with them getting a trade protection clause. If you are able to stick in the NHL long enough to get a clause and perform well enough, your draft location doesn't factor into it at all.