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

Originally Posted by KFIT

So at the end of the day, the players, the player reps, the NHLPA, the NHL, the owners, and the FANS, should all be 100% in agreement that, enough's enough. Sure, there'll be attorneys waiting in line to assist the NHLPA in filing a grievance, using all kinds of precedence to back their case. But the truth of the matter is, this one blew the lid right off the cookie jar, and essentially broke the back of the CBA and the salary cap. Just because a few other players got their contracts approved for less money/years doesn't count as a justification to continue to escalate the wrongness of such a ridiculous contract offer, and anyone using these others as a basis of argument is clearly delusional, and holding on too tightly to the past, and not facing the true reality of the problem right in front of us.

I agree 100% with everything you said, especially this. The fact that a few other questionable contracts squeaked by in the past does not give justification to approve one that so blatantly attempts to exploit a loophole in the CBA. At some point, whether it was now, or whether the next guy that attempted to do it, the NHL needed to take a stand. The NHL's decision, may end up being overturned in court, but the decision needed to be made.

dean should send him an offer for 5 years/20 mill with a bigass pair of lips on it.

Originally Posted by KFIT

Repeat after me - it DOES NOT CIRCUMVENT THE TERMS OF THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT.

The Flyers might have done so knowingly to reduce their cap hit, but:

a) this is an AGING player over 35 years
b) they are obliated to Pronger's cap ht if he plays or not

B is the buzzkill of of the IK deal, not A. If NJ wants to take on IK's cap hit for the life of the deal, the ink dries and IK plays in NJ as long as he wants. The NHL may not have liked Pronger's deal for the sole fact it was trying to reduce the cap hit, but so what, the Flyers then pay the price for their stupidity later on; unless Pronger's He-Man and actually gives them "value" for his cap hit at age 42. Impossible? Not really. But either way, Philly's on the hook, which to me, is on the up and up.

IK, Grossman, and the Devils know full well IK won't be there in 17 years, and if audio/video recordings of their negotiating sessions arose as "evidence" of the negotiations, the Devils would be *screwed* and the NHLPA would have zero leg to stand on for a grievance, as everyone involved know full well there was good faith involved in negotiating a bogus deal in the first place that doesn't just look for a loophole, it rips a gaping hole wide open.

Why now and not Hossa? Why not DiPietro? Ovie? Because this one was the final nail in the coffin, and the first legitimate, no arguments, as clear as day, example of a case so heiniously in violation of the sprit of the CBA that, to be perfectly honest, I'm not even certain that players reps for respective teams would be in favor of approving.

Think of it this way; players aren't stupid. They see an IK get a deal like this, and they assume "hmm, I wonder if *my* agent can now circumvent the system in my favor?". If this started happening en masse, then teams simply wouldn't be able to legitimately *afford* good talent - not by sheer virtue of the cap hit, but the fact that ticket prices would continue to rise, costs would escalate out of control, the sport would lose fans even further, a major TV deal beyond Vs. in the US would never happen, and the big one, another lockout would occur.

So at the end of the day, the players, the player reps, the NHLPA, the NHL, the owners, and the FANS, should all be 100% in agreement that, enough's enough. Sure, there'll be attorneys waiting in line to assist the NHLPA in filing a grievance, using all kinds of precedence to back their case. But the truth of the matter is, this one blew the lid right off the cookie jar, and essentially broke the back of the CBA and the salary cap. Just because a few other players got their contracts approved for less money/years doesn't count as a justification to continue to escalate the wrongness of such a ridiculous contract offer, and anyone using these others as a basis of argument is clearly delusional, and holding on too tightly to the past, and not facing the true reality of the problem right in front of us.

And yes, while the NHL is "just a game" to most of us, it is indeed a business. And while as fans, we're each just a drop in the very large bucket of the NHL world, collectively, we are a large contingency for the reason this business exists. After all, it's *our* collective dollars paying these salaries in one way or another. Even Devils fans should feel slightly dirty over how this went down. Sure, it's nice to know your team got the free agent prize it sought, which is up for debate HOW much IK improves the team, but not in any way debatable that a healthy full season of his with the Devils indeed makes them better.

But the fact that it required so much sidestepping of the nature of the salary cap in and of itself in order to happen should shame and embarrass Devils fans; shoot, even their own GM condemned the act itself! The contrarian will say, "but the Kings were courting him in a similar deal, wouldn't you be happy if he were a King with a somewhat similar deal?" and my answer today is the same it was 21 days ago....."No!".

I like DL's model, and not only has it proved fruitful for the Kings so far, it's also one built on a solid premise that appeases fans, owners, GM's, and players alike, without grossly shifting the balance of power in the NHL business world unfairly in any one of the aforementioned's favor.

Nicely done...........

Originally Posted by KFIT

Repeat after me - it DOES NOT CIRCUMVENT THE TERMS OF THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT.

The Flyers might have done so knowingly to reduce their cap hit, but:

a) this is an AGING player over 35 years
b) they are obliated to Pronger's cap ht if he plays or not

B is the buzzkill of of the IK deal, not A. If NJ wants to take on IK's cap hit for the life of the deal, the ink dries and IK plays in NJ as long as he wants. The NHL may not have liked Pronger's deal for the sole fact it was trying to reduce the cap hit, but so what, the Flyers then pay the price for their stupidity later on; unless Pronger's He-Man and actually gives them "value" for his cap hit at age 42. Impossible? Not really. But either way, Philly's on the hook, which to me, is on the up and up.

IK, Grossman, and the Devils know full well IK won't be there in 17 years, and if audio/video recordings of their negotiating sessions arose as "evidence" of the negotiations, the Devils would be *screwed* and the NHLPA would have zero leg to stand on for a grievance, as everyone involved know full well there was good faith involved in negotiating a bogus deal in the first place that doesn't just look for a loophole, it rips a gaping hole wide open.

Why now and not Hossa? Why not DiPietro? Ovie? Because this one was the final nail in the coffin, and the first legitimate, no arguments, as clear as day, example of a case so heiniously in violation of the sprit of the CBA that, to be perfectly honest, I'm not even certain that players reps for respective teams would be in favor of approving.

Think of it this way; players aren't stupid. They see an IK get a deal like this, and they assume "hmm, I wonder if *my* agent can now circumvent the system in my favor?". If this started happening en masse, then teams simply wouldn't be able to legitimately *afford* good talent - not by sheer virtue of the cap hit, but the fact that ticket prices would continue to rise, costs would escalate out of control, the sport would lose fans even further, a major TV deal beyond Vs. in the US would never happen, and the big one, another lockout would occur.

So at the end of the day, the players, the player reps, the NHLPA, the NHL, the owners, and the FANS, should all be 100% in agreement that, enough's enough. Sure, there'll be attorneys waiting in line to assist the NHLPA in filing a grievance, using all kinds of precedence to back their case. But the truth of the matter is, this one blew the lid right off the cookie jar, and essentially broke the back of the CBA and the salary cap. Just because a few other players got their contracts approved for less money/years doesn't count as a justification to continue to escalate the wrongness of such a ridiculous contract offer, and anyone using these others as a basis of argument is clearly delusional, and holding on too tightly to the past, and not facing the true reality of the problem right in front of us.

And yes, while the NHL is "just a game" to most of us, it is indeed a business. And while as fans, we're each just a drop in the very large bucket of the NHL world, collectively, we are a large contingency for the reason this business exists. After all, it's *our* collective dollars paying these salaries in one way or another. Even Devils fans should feel slightly dirty over how this went down. Sure, it's nice to know your team got the free agent prize it sought, which is up for debate HOW much IK improves the team, but not in any way debatable that a healthy full season of his with the Devils indeed makes them better.

But the fact that it required so much sidestepping of the nature of the salary cap in and of itself in order to happen should shame and embarrass Devils fans; shoot, even their own GM condemned the act itself! The contrarian will say, "but the Kings were courting him in a similar deal, wouldn't you be happy if he were a King with a somewhat similar deal?" and my answer today is the same it was 21 days ago....."No!".

I like DL's model, and not only has it proved fruitful for the Kings so far, it's also one built on a solid premise that appeases fans, owners, GM's, and players alike, without grossly shifting the balance of power in the NHL business world unfairly in any one of the aforementioned's favor.

This is a terrific post, really, but the be all end all in my opinion is that the NHL approved Hossa/DiPietro etc, which were arguably as egregious as far as intent. Why do they take a stand on this one? You can't close the door once the horses are out. Yes, it is a silly silly deal, but them's the rules as they have been played so far. Bettman, a lawyer, should realize a loophole when he sees one. Anyone have any idea if the Devils can appeal this decision, what a timetable would be, and what the possible outcomes may be?
As a Devils fan I find it unusual that Bettman constantly seems to change things as far as the Devils are concerned. The reaction to playing defense(you all call it the trap), the goalie puck handling restrictions, and now this. Not whining or calling conspiracy...but whoever said 'don't boo Bettman' at the draft can kiss my red/black/and white striped ass in Macy's window.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

You can't close the door once the horses are out.

If you still got horses in the stable, and you know you can't get the ones that already got out, yes. Yes you do. You slam the door on their faces.


I'm not even saying whether or not I agree with you those other contracts should have been approved. Only that this phrase is erroneous, and that I'm laughing at Kovi.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

This is a terrific post, really, but the be all end all in my opinion is that the NHL approved Hossa/DiPietro etc, which were arguably as egregious as far as intent.

Hossa's contract was an intent to circumvent the cap issues, imo, but isn't DiPietro's contract the same $$$ each year? I don't see how that is to circumvent any cap issues.

I think the player's association has 5 days to appeal. In the meantime, the Devils can restructure the contract to meet the NHL's requirements.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

This is a terrific post, really, but the be all end all in my opinion is that the NHL approved Hossa/DiPietro etc, which were arguably as egregious as far as intent. Why do they take a stand on this one? You can't close the door once the horses are out. Yes, it is a silly silly deal, but them's the rules as they have been played so far. Bettman, a lawyer, should realize a loophole when he sees one. Anyone have any idea if the Devils can appeal this decision, what a timetable would be, and what the possible outcomes may be?
As a Devils fan I find it unusual that Bettman constantly seems to change things as far as the Devils are concerned. The reaction to playing defense(you all call it the trap), the goalie puck handling restrictions, and now this. Not whining or calling conspiracy...but whoever said 'don't boo Bettman' at the draft can kiss my red/black/and white striped ass in Macy's window.

DiPietro's deal was just a long a$$ contract. Nothing more.

All other "circumvention" deals have a few years with a questionable salary at the end. Kovy's deal has 6 years of nothing on the end. No comparison at all.

That is like saying that stealing a pack of gum is the same as robbing a liquor store's cash register. Both crimes, both stealing, but not really the same are they? This is an exaggeration, but the point stands.

Things that are painfully obvious:

1.) Lou knew this was Cap Circumvention. This is why he distanced himself from the contract with his comments earlier. He knows damn well this is a BS contract.

2.) Lombardi screamed to high hell to the NHL head offices the second the contract details were released.

3.) Grossman is gonna push for the NHLPA to challenge this ruling to save face. The reputation of being the Agent who brokered an illegal deal is not something you want on your resume.

4.) NHL will want Kovalchuk to stay in NJ. It would be a disaster to have this happen. The league can't afford the bad press going into negotiations with the N.H.L.P.A. and major networks on a TV deal.

5.) This will be fixed shortly as the agents and NHLPA do not want to have this affect other contract negotiations and player movement.

6.) I would say there is less than 1% chance the Kings even get the opportunity to talk to Ilya Kovalchuk about a contract EVER AGAIN!


7.) We still don't know who Jack Johnson's D partner is gonna be?