Thread: Kovalchuk part V, The NHL Strikes Back, NHLPA files Grievance (All Discussion Here )

Originally Posted by sonic4.6

what exactly did he say?

Look back a few pages, somebody posted what was quoted on NHL.com

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=5...id=DL|NHL|home

Kovalchuk wouldn't confirm his other suitors, but one was definitely the Los Angeles Kings. He went on what amounted to a college-style recruiting visit to L.A. last week with his wife, Nicole, who had never been there before.

"Nobody put any timing on me, so I decided to take my time, to go there (to L.A.), met the general manager, a couple of guys on the team and that only helped me to make my decision," he said. "I don't know what I learned, but that's how it should be. When you agree to stay with a team for the rest of your career, you want to be 110 percent sure you're making the right decision."

Kovalchuk made his decision upon returning from Los Angeles, and he firmly believes he will play out his entire 17-year contract even if, as he said, it means upping his training regimen in say 10 years, when he'll be 37 years old.

"It wasn't really about money," he said. "It was more where are you going to spend the rest of your hockey life, but after that, when you spend that kind of time in a city you may stay there for the rest of your life. That was the main concern for us, what kind of area is here and what kind of schools are here. I have three kids. It's really all about the family."

I can't believe we have to entertain even the possibility of this **** again.

Originally Posted by arizonabay

The deal will go into effect before IK is 35, thus it will come off the books if he retires. If it went into effect after he was 35, such as Pronger's, it would count regardless.

Would people PLEASE stop bringing up the over 35 clause? I know about it. The point is that philly did that deal for the very same reason nj did this one. To lower the overall hit.

Christ, werent a bunch of you saying a day ago that it wouldnt be worth the risk to find out he wants to play in to his 40's for that cap hit? Now it's clear he won't? Make up your minds would ya?

For the record, I still see no evidence that the nhl has to void this deal. Only theories.
Posted via Mobile Device

Originally Posted by SmytheKing

So? Isnt IK going to be 40 in the last couple of years? What grounds does the nhl have to void the deal? Honestly. You cant argue anything is unique on the deal or terms.
Posted via Mobile Device

The NHL wouldn't approve a contract like this that ran until Kovy was 60 or 50. So where's the line? Well, I imagine some will say that 42 is now the line. But you also have to look at the 5 years of the highest possible salary ($11.5 million) followed within a few years by the lowest possible salary.

Everyone with a brain knows Kovy wouldn't be playing at 40, let alone 44, for $550k. Everyone with a brain also knows that NJ wouldn't take a cap hit of $6 million for a player in his forties.

If you read the CBA provision, I think Bettman has the authority to do this. I also think the NHLPA will fight this.

The next CBA needs to get rid of this AAV bull**** and make the annual cap hit whatever the player is making in that particular year.

For example, Kovy's cap hit for the first 2 years of his deal in NJ would be 6.5 million, and his next 5 years would be a cap hit of 11.5 million to NJ.

This would discourage GMs from giving players 10 million+ a year and hopefully keep the NHL from becoming the mess that MLB has become.

Originally Posted by SmytheKing

I say the NHLPA steps in and in two weeks or so, a judge says the NHL has no grounds because they've approved similar contracts in the past years. Not to mention, it's not unprecedented for a player to play in his 40's. There's not really a way for them to prove any salary cap circumvention even though EVERYONE knows it's just that.

Interesting. If the burden of proof is on the Devils to prove the contract was negotiated in good faith, the organization might have to show how it justified the contract price into its latter years. Could be a tough sell.

heh.

EJHradek_ESPN

Waiting for Dean Lombardi to announce (with gusto): I'm back in!

Parise to the Kings!!! Just kidding.

The point is, they added those years to Pronger's contract to lower the cap hit, but it'll count against their cap no matter what, making it moot. Philly will be held accountable for the full term and amount of the deal. That's not circumvention.