• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Greatness=PavelDatsyuk

NHL Rejects Kovalchuk's Contract

Rate this topic

224 posts in this topic

I also find it funny that the Devils had a press conference announcing the contract...and then they got smacked down by the league. That's just embarrassing.

Just few hours after, haha...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only contract you can really compare to this is the Hossa deal, which didn't exactly pass through with flying colours. If I was investigating the Hossa contract, I'm not sure I would have approved it, but going to the Kovalchuk contract, not approving is easy. Hossa's contract ends when he is 42 (too old if you ask me, but not 44 like Kovalchuk's). It's 12 years vs. Kovalchuk's 17 years. This is an issue, but not as big of an issue for me. The next issue is that Kovalchuk gets a larger % of the money in the deal earlier than the Hossa deal.

So, in summary, I think the NHL could have easily nixed the Hossa deal, but approving that deal shouldn't not give rise to consistency questions by not approving the Kovalchuk contract, there are enough significant differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also one to be a little surprised at the NHL for taking some initiative for once with something like this. Interesting to see how it pans out. KHL for Ilya? I think he wants a Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DiPietro contract was kind of stunning at the time, but it's not comparable to Kovalchuk's or even Zetterberg's/Hossa's. DiPietro makes $4.5M every year for 15 years. The Isles don't benefit from any junk years at the end that he's unlikely to play bringing the cap hit down. And the deal ends when he's 41, which is reasonable.

Even though DiPietro has been injured nearly the entire time, that doesn't really have any bearing on anything. The Isles get cap relief for their missing player just like any other team does for having anyone on IR, but DiPietro is still going to get paid every year until he retires.

What do you mean it's not comparable? All of these deal's have the same objective at the end of the day which is to lower the cap hit of a player by adding maybe years into a contract. Every team does benefit to a degree from those junk years as you put it as they now have a lower cap hit player so they have more "cap money" to play around with. Again all of this could of been avoided if the NHL would of stopped it at the DiPietro deal and set the expectation of what a real contract should be.

You bring up a even better point. What if a player sign's a contract like this then gets a career threatening injury during the beginning of the contract life? Players can just try to get better and still collect money from possible playing a handful of games every year. I admit the owner is dumb for signing a contract like this in the first place but that is why I would think the NHL had a lockout season so the league can manage stuff like this from happening. They failed to do that with the contract that started all of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DiPietros contract isnt really a fair comparison. The money he makes never drops a cent in any year of the contract so their is no "garbage years".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DiPietros contract isnt really a fair comparison. The money he makes never drops a cent in any year of the contract so their is no "garbage years".

With DiPietro, and his injuries, every year is a junk year, OH!

:yahoo:

:banana:

:hockeysmile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also one to be a little surprised at the NHL for taking some initiative for once with something like this. Interesting to see how it pans out. KHL for Ilya? I think he wants a Cup.

Then he made a mistake by choosing the Devils.

DiPietros contract isnt really a fair comparison. The money he makes never drops a cent in any year of the contract so their is no "garbage years".

Correct. It's $4.5M throughout.

http://capgeek.com/players/display.php?id=1101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then he made a mistake by choosing the Devils.

Correct. It's $4.5M throughout.

http://capgeek.com/players/display.php?id=1101

Well he wanna get paid, cash in, it's his job, you can't choose the biggest contract and also best chance for cup, you get your dreamcontract and aim to have a decent chance of winning, NJ is a decent team but most likely won't win any time soon.. he couldn't sign with vancouver, detroit, chicago, pittsburgh, boston, washington and the powerhouse teams because they have no cap room for the money he wanted

Either you take:

1. Best chance for cup & s***ty salary

2. Bad/Decent chance for cup & maximum salary

I think all pro players pick #2 unless they are in latter stages of their career, already cashed in and is desperate for cup

Edited by mindfly
55fan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured as much. I mean come on, a 17 year deal? In the words of Ocho Cinco, child please!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on earth does he think he is worth as much as he is? I think he is a tad delusional. Is he going to be another Yashin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on earth does he think he is worth as much as he is? I think he is a tad delusional. Is he going to be another Yashin?

This is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't a huge fan of this deal, but It bothers me that the league is invalidating this deal by a subjective standard and has not made clear what they see this standard as. Of course the deal violates the so-called "spirit" of the cap, but I don't see how you could say it does so anymore than any of the other deals. If the NHL has a problem with these deals, it should wait for the next cba.

Why do people keep saying this? None of these other deals were anywhere near as blatant as this one.

zettsyukwall415 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people keep saying this? None of these other deals were anywhere near as blatant as this one.

Agreed 100%

Zetterberg and Franzen's contracts take them up to age 40 (look at Lidstrom, Yzerman, Chelios, Hasek, etc...)

The Wings have a history of utilizing older players later in their careers than most teams, so these deals are not at ALL out of the realm of possibility of being completed...

Hossa's deal is sketchy, as it takes him to 42/43 and he has had a few injuries with the way he plays - much less likely to get completed, but also only a 12 year deal... not 17

Pronger's deal - after 35, so if they want to sign him to 100 years, let them - it's on the cap regardless and it's their own choice if they want to eat future cap after he retires...

This deal there wasn't even a grey area, it was flat out designed to circumvent the cap and there is NO way he will complete this contract, or at bare minimum (if you REALLY want to stretch) complete this contract at the value it is for.

Keep things in perspective...

Original-Six likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No other contract took a player to the age of 44 and no other contract trailed off in later years quite as significantly.

Rejecting this deal was an absolute no brainer to me.

exactly. there's a huge difference between Z, mule and hossa playing until they're 40 or worst case shaving 2 years off their career and kovy playing until he's 44. if they all play to the age of 38 then 3 of them shave 2 years off of their contracts and kovy shaves 6 years off, which would only pay him 3.5 mil for the last 6 of that BS contract.

kovalchuk will hang em' up at 38 and walk into the hall. cut the 44 s***. stupid devils :angry:

The problem is the players salaries are rising faster than the salary cap. Teams are being forced to come up with ideas like this to get around it. If these mega deals get rejected and things stay the way they are, you're eventually going to have a situation where every team in the league has just two stars and a bunch of AHLers or a team of mediocre players.

:lol::lol::yowza: penguins :!:

Original-Six likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how they're differentiating this from the other contracts like it.

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.

Zetterberg and Franzen's contracts take them up to age 40 (look at Lidstrom, Yzerman, Chelios, Hasek, etc...)

The Wings have a history of utilizing older players later in their careers than most teams, so these deals are not at ALL out of the realm of possibility of being completed...

Hossa's deal is sketchy, as it takes him to 42/43 and he has had a few injuries with the way he plays - much less likely to get completed, but also only a 12 year deal... not 17

Pronger's deal - after 35, so if they want to sign him to 100 years, let them - it's on the cap regardless and it's their own choice if they want to eat future cap after he retires...

This deal there wasn't even a grey area, it was flat out designed to circumvent the cap and there is NO way he will complete this contract, or at bare minimum (if you REALLY want to stretch) complete this contract at the value it is for.

Keep things in perspective...

Exactly :clap: :clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well he wanna get paid, cash in, it's his job, you can't choose the biggest contract and also best chance for cup, you get your dreamcontract and aim to have a decent chance of winning, NJ is a decent team but most likely won't win any time soon.. he couldn't sign with vancouver, detroit, chicago, pittsburgh, boston, washington and the powerhouse teams because they have no cap room for the money he wanted

Either you take:

1. Best chance for cup & s***ty salary

2. Bad/Decent chance for cup & maximum salary

I think all pro players pick #2 unless they are in latter stages of their career, already cashed in and is desperate for cup

This statement is interesting because it's true. It makes you wonder what happens when players sign these forever contracts and there teams continue to suck, then what? They are stuck with forever contracts nobody wants and they can't get a cup because there stupid contract held the team hostage. I'd say one thing that also helps wings credibility is that a lot of there players never leave anyway, so life time contracts are basically already a common place in Detroit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't have these kind of looong contracts if a proper soft salary cap and luxury tax was in place. Bettman is a moron, it's hard to believe this guy was David Stern's understudy.

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? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The average NHL player as a whole has never been better then now. Sports evolve, and you may argue that less teams= less diluted talent, but everyone seems to forget that back even in the 80's the league was over 90% NA.

There is a much bigger pool to draw from today. This is the reason the league has a lot more top guys, but no truly elite guys that stand miles ahead of everyone like Lemueix and Gretzky did. The vast increase in youth leagues/training, as well as far more balanced nutrition and talent pool to draw from has made for far more player parity then you could ever imagine.

You're going to call me insane, but I would honestly be shocked if Boyd Deverauex as he is now would not have been a consistent all-star in the 50s. The conditioning, speed, and overall talent of all the players will continue to improve, its just the natural way a sport grows. Do you really think the quality of game has suffered? If so, I suggest you get your nostalgia glasses off, and watch how easy it was for skill players to dominate in the 80s. Slow-ass defensemen and non-butterfly goaltending... yeah real challenging.

Exactly. With the skill every player has now, even the worst NHL'er would have been very good.

1) I never disagreed that their should or should not be a team in non-traditional markets, was simply responding to your viewpoint that there are more scrubs in the NHL today.

2)4-5 plugs on every team? Name one besides Meech on the Red Wing's right now. Yes, there are journymen in the league, but there will always be. This does not reflect overall talent, but moreso how it's spread out between the average player and the then fringe players.

3)I know a lot of the players out there today are frustrating, but I suggest you re-watch some 80's hockey, there was actually a good wing's link posted just a few days ago. There may be players today who are far worse then the average nhler, but that is because of the talent level now, not because the average talent level has dipped. If the league's average player had the skillset of an all-star now, players like Dan Cleary would be considered a scrub, due to talent relativity, not due to an overall decline in talent of the league.

Edit: I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you that the league would be better with fewer teams, just that you can't look at a location of a team and judge whether or not it has a right to exist. There are sunbelt expansion horror stories to be sure, but teams like Tampa Bay, San Jose, and Dallas have all been some of the best supported teams the last few years.

As for too many scrubs in the league, of course it would be nice to see only the best of the best play, but I really don't see the epidemic of fringe NHLers you speak of. Do you really think a 4th liner in todays game like Drew Miller is worse then a 4th liner in the 80s?

Puffy's getting styled on :lol:

wake up folks... the only reason this contract is being rejected is because an owner or two is protesting. more than likely its the Kings' owner raising a kerfuffle. the previous deals were allowed to go through cuz in the end no one objected.

nice avatar....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on earth does he think he is worth as much as he is? I think he is a tad delusional. Is he going to be another Yashin?

The realistic part of his contract was about 95 mil. for 10 yrs. 9.5 per year. That is comparable with the other top players. And seeing that he is the only superstar UFA available this year, it is realistic to for him to expect to get OV/Crosby type money. He is as good or has a chance of being just as good as them, given a decent team to play for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obviously not delusional for him to think he's worth that kind of money considering multiple teams have offered that kind of money. Your worth is determined by those bidding for your services!

I'm not surprised the deal was rejected. It was a pretty clear circumvention of the salary cap, but then again I thought the same thing about multiple other contracts. The clearest solution to closing the loophole would be to put limits on the differences in salaries paid throughout the duration of a contract. For example, if no year could be 50% less than any other year throughout the duration of the contract, the least amount the Devils could tack on in those final years would be almost $6M, eliminating the entire purpose of those last five years and also decreasing the length of contracts handed out. It would've worked with Hossa, Luongo, and even Zetterberg and Franzen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now