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

But Lou is going to win this one. Why? Kolalchuk said it wasn't about money, it was about winning, and NJ was the choice for winning. Now Lou can say we can't pay you as much, but that's OK because it wasn't about money anyway, right? Right?

Ilya, I really wish you had made a different decision a few days ago, but that ship has sailed.

Originally Posted by PuckHead27

That's funny, I read the entire quote (and not just what the other poster high lighted) and I got the impression that he and his wife were not impressed with the area. Everyone keeps saying it's a choice between New Jersey or LA, but in reality it's Manhattan vs Los Angeles. The Big Apple won this time. To each his own.

Actually, I think he was just trying to say anything but the truth. The Kings did not offer me my $100M deal, so I signed in NJ.

If he really did not want LA because of the area, why take a week to figure that out? Why negotiate with LA for another 4-5 days?

He is about the money and he was trying to hide that fact.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

It's really just Gary B. trying to retrofit a problem he helped create.

Actually, if you want to be entirely accurate:

Originally Posted by Bob McKenzie

Interesting note: NJD capologist Steve Pellegrini was significant contributor to CBA creation when with NHL as Bill Daly's right hand guy.

Bob McKenzie (TSNBobMcKenzie) on Twitter

So is it Gary B trying to retrofit a problem, or is Steve Pellegrini trying to expand the loophole he actually created, or both?

Regardless, this will be over in 5 days.

Originally Posted by Riofan

Much agreed.

Jersey fans are so focused on the precedent set by previous cap circumventing contracts that they may fail to realize how blatant Kovalchuk's is.

And understandably so, IMO. I can guarantee had the Kings signed him to a similar deal and had the same outcome, plenty of us here would be using these same precedents as our ammo. We all have our purple colored (or in JerseyDevil's case, red colored) glasses on to an extent. And honestly, I think both sides have a legitimate argument. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Originally Posted by symbology

Actually, I think he was just trying to say anything but the truth. The Kings did not offer me my $100M deal, so I signed in NJ.

If he really did not want LA because of the area, why take a week to figure that out? Why negotiate with LA for another 4-5 days?

He is about the money and he was trying to hide that fact.

Yep, it's always been about the money. It is NOT a coincidence that he signed a deal that was larger than the one he initially rejected from Atlanta. He rejects a $100M deal and accepts an $80M deal. Then it's not entirely about the money. He rejects a $100M deal for a $102M deal...well, it speaks for itself. Why else would NJ basically bid against itself on this? Why not just sign for $85M and help NJ out? That's because it was about the money.

Originally Posted by Birdman

Actually, if you want to be entirely accurate:



Bob McKenzie (TSNBobMcKenzie) on Twitter

So is it Gary B trying to retrofit a problem, or is Steve Pellegrini trying to expand the loophole he actually created, or both?

Regardless, this will be over in 5 days.

If anyone is going to know how to exploit a system...it's creator is the person you would look to. Is Lou that much shrewder for signing the guy who wrote the book? Look, I agree with everyone...it's a steal, and it should be illegal...but all it really does is point out the flaws in a broken system.

Just a little clarification on Hossa's Contract.

NHLNumbers has his contract at:

7 yrs. 7.9M
1 yr. 4M
2 yrs. 1M
2 yrs. .75M

Cap Hit 5.233M

Cap Geek has his contract at:

7 yrs. 7.9M
1 yr. 4M
4 yrs. 1M

Cap Hit 5.275M


I would believe Cap Geek over NHL Numbers and was also verified per ESPN article:

Sources: Hossa, Pronger deals probed

Hossa signed a 12-year deal with the Blackhawks that begins with payments of $7.9 million for the first seven years and finishes with four years at $1 million annually. The overall cap hit for the Blackhawks is a completely manageable $5.275 million a year.

The deals in question have to do with the lengths of the contracts and the probabilities that there is a likely chance that the players will still be playing the final years of their contracts. There is precedence in the NHL that players will play until they are 39 and 40 but after that there is very little evidence that the players will still be active except in very rare cases. Also, with concern to players salaries and age there is very little evidence that veteran players with half decent talent will ever take a salary of less than 1M.

With IK's contract the likeliness that IK will play past the age of 40 and ever accept and play for a salry of less than 1M really shows how this contract is trying to circumvent the intent of the salary cap in the CBA.

I wonder if the rest of the players in the league took a look at how much money they lose due to Escrow on deals like these. The fact of the matter is the majority of the players get to subsidize the large earning years of these deals and then when the player retires they never get their "payback" provided they are still even in the league. If I'm on the kings and I see this contract I would tell my league rep for sure I don't want the NHLPA to file the greviance, but even other teams may follow suit.