Adam Proteau thinks there should be a maximum length an NHL player can be a healthy scratch for trade-related reasons.

The new parlance in the NHL world is “trade-related-reasons”, or “TRR”. For a millisecond there, the phrase on everyone’s mind was “draft capital”, but that is now long, long ago in our quick-cut, nonexistent-attention-span hockey community. TRR is the hot phrase, and we’re currently seeing notable examples of it.

We first heard the TRR phrase over the weekend, when the Arizona Coyotes – a team that has been absolutely transparent in its plan to tank this season – used it to describe the reason veteran defenseman Jakob Chychrun was a healthy scratch. Immediately after the announcement, we anticipated a quick resolution and a reveal of which team had stepped up to acquire Chychrun. But it didn’t happen, and as of Tuesday afternoon, it still hadn’t happened.

Meanwhile, earlier Tuesday, the Columbus Blue Jackets revealed they were making blueliner Vladislav Gavrikov a healthy scratch for – you guessed it – trade-related reasons. The Russian defenseman has been rumored to be on the trade block all season long, so nobody was surprised when the Blue Jackets made it clear Gavrikov would be an ex-Blue-Jacket in the coming days. 

We all understood why the Coyotes and Blue Jackets would go this route – by putting a player on the sidelines, you’re guarding against potential injury.

The issue here is, how long should we allow teams to wait as they hold out players for trade-related reasons? A few days? Five days? More?

We’re firmly in the camp of a little bit longer than one week – seven to nine days, let’s say – to allow teams to hold out veteran players who otherwise would be in the lineup. Anything 10 days or longer seems unfair to the player who is in limbo. 

We understand trades that may have appeared to be evident suddenly die on the vine, and suddenly, teams could be back to the drawing board with the player in question. Up to the moment the appropriate signatures confirm a trade, it can fall apart and leave the “seller” team in an uncomfortable position with an asset it no longer wants.

Nevertheless, a trade that’s crumbled shouldn’t permit the seller team to keep a healthy player on the sidelines longer than a few days after one week. If a trade hasn’t worked out, you should put the player back into the lineup extremely quickly. It’s really that simple.

Again, we’re not faulting teams for being honest about their reasons for taking a player out of the lineup in anticipation of an imminent trade. But there’s a difference between that and keeping a player out of active duty for upwards of two weeks. In such a case, the “imminent” part of the trade no longer qualifies. That’s not fair to the player, the team itself, the fans, and the league. You’re actively taking away a skilled competitor – someone the fans pay to see – and wrapping them in a bubbled wrap that has too much bubble wrap on it.

In the short term, we should give the seller team the benefit of the doubt regarding TRR. But there’s a limit to our patience. Teams don’t have the right to stash away a key asset for as long as it suits them. There has to be a defined period in which teams can keep a player they intend to trade. There must be a finish line imposed on NHL GMs who might have the intent to go the super-safe route and keep a player out as long as the letter of the law permits them to.

The term TRR is the fashionable phrase of the moment, and its presence calls for the league to establish rules to deal with it. If you give GMs an inch, they’ll take a mile. For that reason, the league should be moving to address this issue ASAP and ensure players who are able to play get back on the ice.