Frozen-Man

They could stretch his contract out for 30 years and he would still retire before 40 (so no CBA worries). Front load it and the $750k for the last decade, you'd get an insanely low cap hit.

Yeah I agree, that will make it incredibly hard for the team on the penalty kill. I would think it would raise PPG 15-20%.

I read he may still go to Philly that he was keeping his options open and just wasn't ready to decide. I guess sort of like Modano was how I took it.

I second that, let the guys home remain at least semi-private

I found it interesting how Burnside didn't really lay out all of the stats regarding Mondano. He made it sound like he did very little for the Stars last year but the fact is he was 8th on the team in goals, 8th on the team in assists, 9th on the team in points and yet was 17th on the team in time on ice per game and was still better than half a point per game player on the 3rd/4th line and playing on a team that scored 30 goals less than the Wings. I think you can make an argument that the Wings don't need his services but I don't think an argument can be made that he isn't/wouldn't be productive for the price.

I don't think by one and done he meant that they would win the Cup next year but merely that they would not likely remain in contention, as a team being favored as likely winning the cup. I understand what you are saying but the Wings have not been one and done since 2004, they have had a legit shot at winning or at least challenging for the Cup each year (yeah they my have been ousted early some years but that is playoff hockey, they were and continue to be a team that is capable and expected to contend for a Cup. That IMO means that they are not "done."

:hysterical:

I know, it cracks me up, you'd think it was junior high and who is your best best friend.

I think that is a legitimate argument. I personally think the benefit is worth the risk but understand your point. Its the not wanting him because he is no longer a superstar or that he was a -6 last year that I don't get.

Agreed, even on a pretty bad Dallas team last year he was a .58 ppg player.

Look at his team stats and it is not really that bad and its not really fair to compare his +/- to another teams. Look at Dallas over all and they are a MINUS team, they had two guys total that were above a +3 the Wings had seven. The Wings were a +13 in goal differential and the Stars were a -17, it makes a huge difference to play on a team that scores 13 more goals than its opponents rather than one that gives up 17 more goals than its opponents. That 30 goal difference will really impact any player's plus/minus. And even on a much better goal differential team a guy like Brad Stuart was a -12 (twice the +/- of Modano - FYI I wouldn't normally compare a forward and defensive player's +/- but am using it here to show how many variables alter that stat rather than to actually compare the two) last year but I'd say he was still a good addition.

Yes, Helm and Abby have not been treated well by the Wings organization, that is something you often hear about this franchise. You mean controlling . . like trying to dictate what is the appropriate amount of posting. Um, I think you mean shortsighted and also I don't think the phrase "still very good" is speaking about the past it is speaking of the present. His own team is not in the same situation as the Wings. The Wings should make the playoffs with a ripe and well developed team that has a legitimate shot at winning the Stanley Cup and only need to tweak their team. Dallas on the other hand did not make the playoff and is rebuilding their team for future success. It is not the same to compare what Dallas needs and what Detroit needs.

Exactly, or even take Kovy's exact contract and have a 20 year old sign it. It might be incredibly dumb and might be criticized as such but most likely would not be rejected by the NHL because the player would only be 37 when it was over.

Would this be the same David Stern who has his own salary problems and from all reports will have a lock out of their own?

Because it is different. As I stated in the Kovy contract thread as a tax attorney there is a phrase when dealing with the IRS "Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered." When Z and Mule had their deals the drop off in $ wasn't as steep or long on the tail end, they were only signed until the age of 40 (and the league acknowledged at that time that the Wings had a history of getting good mileage out of their players and had several examples of Wing's players playing until they were 40), the length of the contract wasn't as long, and the overall cap hit was a slight reduction from their prime years pay (Z max year amount $7.75M, cap hit $6.083M = $1.667M difference, Mule max year amount $5.5M, cap hit $3.955M = $1.545M difference, whereas Kovy max year amount $11.5M, cap hit $6M = $5.5M difference). There is a great difference between the two, Z and Mule were pigs, then you move on to Hossa and Pronger, little bit longer and/or little bit older and/or little bit more disparity on pay/cap hit therefore they (unlike Z and Mule) get their contracts scrutinized however, they are still just considered pigs. Then comes Kovy, longer term, older age at the end of the contract, greater disparity in pay/cap hit at his prime so finally the bounds are pushed too far and he is considered a hog and thus gets slaughtered. This happens in tax law all the time. If you are a minority owner of a business (own less than 50% of the business) and sell your business interest you can take a discount on the valuation of the business for minority interest/lack of marketability/lack of control. The IRS has never set a percentage for discount but if you discount it 25-35% you will almost never get challenged, 35-45% you might get challenged, and 50%+ you stand a great likelihood of getting challenged. Some clients don't care and want to throw the dice and discount the value by 60% they are likely to get caught but will take the risk, they are hogs and likely to get slaughtered. That is what happened here, the actions/tactic wasn't different but the degree was and that is why they rejected the contract. Exactly :clap:

His cap hit will be gone when he retires, he is under 35 so the salary doesn't count against the cap when he retires. He can retire at 38 with 6 years left on his contract and only be out $3.5M of his total $102M contract and there will be no more cap hit. I agree front loaded contracts are not new however the degree is. . . a 17 year front loaded contract that has a hockey player under contract until he is 44 is new not in the fact that it is a front loaded contract but the degree to which it is used. In tax law we have a saying pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. That is what is "new" the change from pigs to hogs and IMO the Devils run the risk of getting slaughtered.

Well its kind of a good and bad. What it was supposed to do was eliminate players structuring weird deals where they made a lot one year or another to manipulate the cap. For example having a great player, lets say Kovy, sign with Detroit making $3M this year and then kicking his salary up to $7M next year in anticipation of Lids retiring and the Wings having a lot more space. You lock the player up but may not have a big cap hit in certain years. Normally it is not near as big a deal to have an average cap hit as it is with this contract and there are rules regarding how much the player's salary can drop from year to year, but the longer the deal the more you can pay high but stretch it out over long term to minimize the cap hit. If players play out the whole contract there is no real problem it is when, like here, no one believes Kovy will play until he is 44.

He has done an absolutely amazing job. It will be interesting to see how he handles things in a few years when he is tight up against the cap. Hard to compare what he is doing to what Holland has to do IMO because Holland always just deals with being right up against the cap and that (thankfully for Stevie) is something he doesn't have to deal with yet (although I'm sure when he does he will be great at that just like he is everything else he does ).

That is why they give out those long contracts so that they can front load them, get the player a lot of cash up front, then trail off to almost nothing (for a pro hockey player ) in the final years so that when you average it out for the term of the contract the high and low average out to a reasonable cap hit. Take Z for example, he will make $7.75M next year but his cap hit is only $6.038M because he only makes $1M in 2019-20 and 2020-21.

The cap hit is the average of the contract over the years regardless of how it is actually paid out. $100M / 17 years = $5.88M cap hit per year for 17 years.

Oh yeah I agree. That's what I said a few pages back. If 44 is okay then why not 45 if 45 then why not 46. To me there is very little realistic chance Kovy plays out this contract.

Yeah but if it is for the 17 years and the league doesn't contest it that is a $5.88M cap hit - pretty great for Kovy.

No, I think it is a good discussion and an interesting one to have. I don't know if they will challenge that contract but the longer past 40 it gets it gets exponentially more unlikely to be a reality. At some point they would have to address it, what if a 34 year old player signs a 16 year contract getting about 8-10M the first couple of year and then drops off as rapidly as possible for the rest of the contract? At some point it is too much and has to be challenged, I don't know if this reaches that point but playing until 44 is pretty unlikely for Kovy.

I'm not saying that it will happen, I'm not certain that the NHL will challenge the signing if it goes until he is 44 my point is they can challenge it and might chose to do so. They were not happy with the Hossa and Pronger signings last year and commented on the fact it was the first long term contracts that extended into a player's 40's, this contract (again if true) would extend to 44, is that attempting to circumvent the cap? If not would 45, 46, 47? At some point as the limit keeps being pushed they may decided to challenge a contract as being designed to circumvent the cap.

I'm sure his pay those last 4-5 years is really low, $1M or so, that way he can retire and made most of the money. The cap hit would be bad but I doubt the actual pay is. Not quite true, the CBA specifically prohibits attempts to circumvent the cap. What that would be exactly is unclear but the NHL could easily argue that this is what is being done here.