NHL Rejects Kovalchuk Contract

almost 2 years ago Knee high to a duck 51 comments 0 recs |

Comments

I don’t know what to think right now, I can’t believe the devils would hold the press conference they did without assurance it would get approved. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

"Ovechkin is as subtle as a shot of vodka."

by i12swim on Jul 20, 2010 9:35 PM EDT reply actions

I laughed.

On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.

by Chris Burton on Jul 20, 2010 9:41 PM EDT reply actions

me too

Check out Fight For Old DC and DC Sports Plus!

by what Juneau about that? on Jul 20, 2010 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Awesome… thank you NHL!!!

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 9:46 PM EDT reply actions

I think I’m gonna have a few drinks to celebrate. Especially since I don’t work tomorrow :D

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 10:21 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m not a cap expert by any means, but if it means less of these confusing-ass deals, then good on the NHL.

Joe Finley to the Russians: "Como estas?"

by Steck It Out on Jul 20, 2010 10:07 PM EDT reply actions

CBA 26.3: No club may enter into any SPC if it is intended to or has the effect of defeating or circumventing the provisions of the CBA.

"Don't mind WM...he's an all-around jerk."

by Whiter Mage on Jul 20, 2010 10:09 PM EDT reply actions

Wish the NHL would enforce that.

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions

The NHL decides when to enforce the rules if they want to. Happened with headshots, its happening with contracts. Its a load of crap if you ask me.

by DonCaps819 on Jul 20, 2010 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions

The NHL had to change the headshot rule because the old rule didn’t address what was happening. I hope they do the same here and stop the ridiculous contracts that have been going on recently.

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Other contracts have been bad – none THIS bad.

"Don't mind WM...he's an all-around jerk."

by Whiter Mage on Jul 20, 2010 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions

the Pronger contract is pretty bad and I’d have to think the only reason it wasn’t voided is because it’s a 35 plus.

#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.

by RedBirdie on Jul 20, 2010 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions

It being a 35+ made it borderline idiotic. Philly is going to be paying him $5M when he is 41 and 42.

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Not paying him $5M, taking a cap hit of $5M. My bad.

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions

It would have been worse if it weren’t 35+.

Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!

by red army line on Jul 20, 2010 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions

You mean in terms of how much he would get? Or how dumb it is?

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions

I mean, even though they’re circumventing the cap, they get punished because of their silly capologist. If say Pronger’s deal was in fact not 35+ like PHI thought it was, then it would be worse (better for PHI, but worse in the vein of, say, a 50 year deal to, say, Parise)

by red army line on Jul 20, 2010 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Ah… you meant worse as in how much it circumvented the cap?

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah. PHI got punished, at least. NJD wouldn’t have been.

by red army line on Jul 20, 2010 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions

What’s hilarious is that Philly punished themselves – and the NHL let them.

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions

What’s more hilarious is that Philly punished themselves, and the NHL investigated them punishing themselves.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jul 21, 2010 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

You must not forget the all important fact that everyone keeps forgeting

Teams will be able to buyout bad contracts in a few years with no charge against the salary cap when a new CBA is reached.

bread. butter. cheese. VICTORY!

by Prometheus74 on Jul 21, 2010 2:35 AM EDT up reply actions

Yeah, I’m afraid that this is almost certain. It’s going to let a lot of teams off the hook for bad deals.

Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman

by Rob Parker on Jul 21, 2010 8:11 AM EDT up reply actions

Which, someone on ILWT brought up I think, means on Kovy’s 17 year deal if it goes through NJD gets the first two $6 million of his contract and then can buy out the rest…

by red army line on Jul 21, 2010 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions

Yeah I thought about that. What would that do to NJD’s FA reputation though? That would be a PR nightmare with respect to other players, and probably the fans as well.

Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman

by Rob Parker on Jul 21, 2010 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions

It would probably make their FA reputation outstanding. If they have to buy out the Kovy contract for 2/3 of the remaining value of the contract (as in the current CBA), they would essentially be paying Kovalchuk $72 Million over 2 years ($6M per year, plus 2/3rds of the remaining $90M left on his contract), and leaving him free to sign either another monster deal, or play for next to nothing on the team that has the best chance to win a cup.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jul 21, 2010 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions

I think the fact that Philly fucked up so bad and will be dealing with that cap hit when he’s retired is why the NHL hardly made a fuss.

#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.

by RedBirdie on Jul 20, 2010 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Totally agreed. $5M cap hit for a retired player… brilliant!

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions

its certainly way better punishment than voiding the contract and making them negotiate shorter terms!

#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.

by RedBirdie on Jul 20, 2010 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions

I love that they killed this. I was hoping they would.

I also like how everyone gets down on GMGM for some of his moves sometimes but at least he plays by the rules.

by PKLords76 on Jul 20, 2010 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions

D can play to 41-42, especially a guy like Pronger. He conserves energy like nobody else and he takes very little punishment for how much he gives out. 44 for an explosively skilled forward is clearly absurd. I don’t even think Kovalchuk will be playing in the KHL at 44.

Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman

by Rob Parker on Jul 20, 2010 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions

How many dmen have made it to that age though? And will Pronger be worth even close to his $5M cap hit at that age?

by timmyv38 on Jul 20, 2010 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions

The only D that really make it to that age are the elite ones. And Pronger happens to be in that class.

Sure he won’t be the same Pronger. But I could still see him playing in the league and providing something at that age.

I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.

by Steckel Me Elmo on Jul 21, 2010 12:21 AM EDT up reply actions

I can’t think of any recently except Chelios. Lidstrom is approaching that, but he just turned 40 a couple months ago.

by timmyv38 on Jul 21, 2010 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions

59 players have played in the NHL at or above age 40.

18 Defensemen, 13 Goaltenders, and 28 Forwards.

20 players have played at 42 or older, of which 5 played defense. They were: Chris Chelios, Doug Harvey, Tim Horton, Lester Patrick, and Allan Stanley.

If Kovalchuk were to play in the NHL at 44, he would join 8 others that have currently done so. Chris Chelios is the only player to play in the NHL at age 44 or older in the last 30 years.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jul 21, 2010 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions

Cap hit doesn’t matter. He’s worth much more than his cap hit now. He’ll probably still be worth more than his salary at that point if he wants to continue playing.

Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman

by Rob Parker on Jul 21, 2010 8:11 AM EDT up reply actions

I would have to disagree. Cap hit matters very much – more than salary. If his hit is still $5M/yr, that’s the price of a good player going to a 42 year old dman. However, he is worth more than his hit now,

by timmyv38 on Jul 21, 2010 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions

But with Pronger he is outperforming his cap hit in the first years, and underperforming in the late years. That’s the point of making it a longterm contract and it’s going to happen with basically all of the long term contracts with the exception of maybe Backstrom (because he might outperform his contract in every single year).

Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman

by Rob Parker on Jul 21, 2010 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions

Agreed. The thing with the cap is, if Pronger retires at 40 (which wouldn’t be too surprising), Philly will still take a $5M cap hit for the next two seasons. And if he is only making $525K in each of the last two seasons, does he have any motivation to play?

by timmyv38 on Jul 21, 2010 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions

I can’t really answer that. Depends on what his goals are and how much he loves playing. Does Chelios have any motivation?

Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman

by Rob Parker on Jul 21, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions

This is where it gets into players personalities. I don’t know what motivates each of those two. Maybe Pronger won’t care about playing for league minimum and he’ll stay until he’s 42. But very few players, even dmen, can physically continue to play NHL-quality hockey then – especially a physical player like Pronger. Although Chelios did – so there’s no real answer right now.

by timmyv38 on Jul 21, 2010 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions

The thing with Pronger is that he gives abuse but doesn’t take much and rarely has to skate very hard. I think he’ll be able to physically play, it’s going to be mental. Does he want to work as hard as he’ll have to to stay in shape? Can he accept his declining play? Can he accept a smaller role? And normally you don’t make those decisions 7 years ahead of time. Those are normally “cross those bridges when we get there” problems.

Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman

by Rob Parker on Jul 21, 2010 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions

And now we know where the line is — they “expect” players to be playing at 42, but not 44.

It’s funny — we have no horse in this race about where Kovalchuk plays, but I laughed and cheered when I read this.

"It's always good to have vikings."

Proud member of the Oxford dictionary police.

by gfcaps fan on Jul 21, 2010 6:03 AM EDT up reply actions

Maybe they got it confused with this version of the contract (h/t to the one-and-only DGB):

http://bit.ly/dotPTV

by cuqui on Jul 20, 2010 10:33 PM EDT reply actions

It was mentioned in the NY Times Today

The NJ Governor had no comment. If I were Governor, I probably would have said something along the lines of “Luckily for us, the contract is front loaded, we need the tax revenue.”

This would be a great move by the NHL, if they’d done the right thing and similarly shot down Hossa’s contract. Of course, Chicago was still forced to dismantle a cup winning team, whereas New Jersey gamed the system to prevent themselves from having to make any tough choices.

I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.

by iwearstripes on Jul 20, 2010 11:02 PM EDT reply actions

I’m glad that they killed this (if the report turns out to be true) but it is just another case of inconsistency from the NHL front office. Where was this last year when they could have nipped it in the bud.

Now we have to wade through the inevitable NHLPA challenge and the PA may have some some ammo given that the contracts that sk84fun_dc posted in the clips thread were allowed. I’m not sure how well the “this was the most blatant example” argument will fly if the league makes it.

↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → b a (select) start

by renstar on Jul 20, 2010 11:30 PM EDT reply actions

Another RMNB post good for a laugh or three.

http://www.russianmachineneverbreaks.com/2010/07/21/the-latest-updates-from-ilya-kovalchuks-facebook-news-feed/

by timmyv38 on Jul 21, 2010 12:58 AM EDT reply actions

So the PA can file a grievance. Anyone want to lay odds on them doing that? I thought the players in general were starting to get pretty pissed off about losing money to escrow because of contracts like this one.

"It's always good to have vikings."

Proud member of the Oxford dictionary police.

by gfcaps fan on Jul 21, 2010 6:16 AM EDT reply actions