lol - NHL rejects Kovalchuk contract

[Eddie_Shack]

I don't get people that say the NHL should be fair to everyone. This obviously crossed a line. Most people admit that, but how could they do nothing now and just wait for the CBA? They have another FA period next year to get through. Obviously my example of 75 years was extreme, but if they don't stop at 44 years old, why not 48, 50? You HAVE to draw a line somewhere. Just because they made a mistake in not addressing this directly in the CBA doesn't mean they should turn the other way and let people fuck up what we all lost a season for.

I agree. You can argue all day long that all these contracts are the same, but I bet if I laid out Zetterberg, Lecavelier, Hossa, and Kovalchuk's deals in front of my seven year old he would be able to point out "one of these things is not like the other". They just took this too far. If they would have shaved just three years off, and made the last couple of years a million more, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation (even though it would accomplish essentially the same thing).

 

[davnlaguna]

Were previous deals done to get around the Cap? Yes
It is just this one was way over.
It is like stealing from a hotel. They won't say anything if you take home a wrapped bar of soap. They may not say anything if you take home a towel. When you walk out with the flat panel tv under your arm and as you walk through the lobby you say "hey there was nothing in the contract that says I can't have it" they are going to stop you.

 

[filosofy29]

Were previous deals done to get around the Cap? Yes
It is just this one was way over.
It is like stealing from a hotel. They won't say anything if you take home a wrapped bar of soap. They may not say anything if you take home a towel. When you walk out with the flat panel tv under your arm and as you walk through the lobby you say "hey there was nothing in the contract that says I can't have it" they are going to stop you.

I was thinking more along the lines of taking the bathrobe as a better comparison.....but flat panel tv gets the point across a little better.

 

[Destroydacre]

I don't get people that say the NHL should be fair to everyone. This obviously crossed a line. Most people admit that, but how could they do nothing now and just wait for the CBA? They have another FA period next year to get through. Obviously my example of 75 years was extreme, but if they don't stop at 44 years old, why not 48, 50? You HAVE to draw a line somewhere. Just because they made a mistake in not addressing this directly in the CBA doesn't mean they should turn the other way and let people fuck up what we all lost a season for.

In the end Bettman still looks like he's picking favorites. If I take out a credit card in your name with a line of $1,000, and Filo, sorry bud , takes out another in your name with a line of $100,000 should the law pick and choose who they are going after and let me go because the amount of the credit line I opened was less? Both are still fraud are they not? This is exactly the same. Cap circumvention (cap fraud if you will) is the goal of these contracts and whether a team saves $2M on the hit or $5M doesn't matter. It's still "cap fraud." However, per the NHL CBA, "cap fraud" is not illegal. Kovalchuk's contract should stand. It seems pretty obvious to me.

 

[puckhead]

However, per the NHL CBA, "cap fraud" is not illegal. Kovalchuk's contract should stand. It seems pretty obvious to me.

(a) No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.

 

[ELYEAH82]

The law does take into account the level of theft. So your analogy is terrible. Plenty of petty crimes go unpunished while a felony is close to always prosecuted.

 

[Destroydacre]

(a) No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.

You're right, my choice of words was poor. My point (obviously if I haven't driven it home enough) is that basically if the Hossa contract wasn't deemed cap circumvention, then this one shouldn't be either. The precedent was set, IMO.

 

[Destroydacre]

The law does take into account the level of theft. So your analogy is terrible. Plenty of petty crimes go unpunished while a felony is close to always prosecuted.

Your argument would be valid if either of the dollar amounts listed were considered petty. They are not.

 

[Darkstone42]

Your argument would be valid if either of the dollar amounts listed were considered petty. They are not.

The government would likely target the person who put $100,000 on the card first, in all reality. Even though $1000 isn't petty, it is pettier than $100,000, and the government will come down hardest on the folks who break the law hardest. At least that's how the system is set up.

The Kovalchuk contract was worse than the other contracts. The others could at least vaguely claim they they were reasonable, even if barely. This one is, as someone has already pointed out, the only contract out there that has the league max and league min salaries right next to each other. That's absurd. That's not anticipating a player's physical decline, it's assuming his retirement, which you are explicitly not allowed to do.

 

[Destroydacre]

I give up. If people fail to see that Hossa's contract plays out in the exact same cap circumventing way as Kovalchuk's it's not my problem.

 

[ELYEAH82]

I give up. If people fail to see that Hossa's contract plays out in the exact same cap circumventing way as Kovalchuk's it's not my problem.

No one is saying it doesnt. But if you dont see a different degree in the Kovy deal then you should probably give up.

 

[puckhead]

I give up. If people fail to see that Hossa's contract plays out in the exact same cap circumventing way as Kovalchuk's it's not my problem.

I do see your point, fwiw.

the league has opened the barn door on some of the preceding contracts (Hossa especially).
I view the I.K. contract as the straw that broke the camel's back. Is it fair to single him out? in some ways no. In other ways it's like a cop overlooking someone going 10 mph over the speeding limit, but stopping someone going 40mph over.

frankly, fair or not, I am glad they finally have drawn the line in the sand. hopefully in the next CBA they can be a bit more precise on the allowable parameters.

 

[Darkstone42]

I do see your point, fwiw.

the league has opened the barn door on some of the preceding contracts (Hossa especially).
I view the I.K. contract as the straw that broke the camel's back. Is it fair to single him out? in some ways no. In other ways it's like a cop overlooking someone going 10 mph over the speeding limit, but stopping someone going 40mph over.

frankly, fair or not, I am glad they finally have drawn the line in the sand. hopefully in the next CBA they can be a bit more precise on the allowable parameters.

This is kind of how I feel about it. I won't deny that Hossa's deal was cap-circumventing, but it wasn't as obvious. There's a precedent for players playing at 42, not for players playing at 44. There's a precedent for washed-up veterans playing for about $1 million, not for them playing for league minimum. There's a precedent for contracts diminishing gradually over time, not for a contract jumping almost immediately from $10+ million to $550K.

 

[CatScrap]

I don't get people that say the NHL should be fair to everyone. This obviously crossed a line. Most people admit that, but how could they do nothing now and just wait for the CBA? They have another FA period next year to get through. Obviously my example of 75 years was extreme, but if they don't stop at 44 years old, why not 48, 50? You HAVE to draw a line somewhere. Just because they made a mistake in not addressing this directly in the CBA doesn't mean they should turn the other way and let people fuck up what we all lost a season for.

I do agree that something has to be done in the short term, and it was a good decision to deny this contract. I do agree it is outside of the spirit of the CBA and should not be a valid contract.

Long term, however, I do not believe that one man should be able to pick and choose which contracts are valid and which ones are not based on his own opinion. This will create a whole new "underground" dirty backhanded level of politics that will take place behind the scenes. This could kill a sport. This problem needs to be addressed by fixing it with a rule tweak or two in the new CBA, not by handing a person supreme executive power....

 

[loki604]

Let's not forget the NHL investigated the Hossa contract and issued a formal warning that they would no longer put up with this bullshit. Everyone basically knew that one more step above Hossa's would not be tolerated, so it's not as if this came out of nowhere. And the Kovy contract went about three steps above Hossa's.

 

[The Croz Man Cometh]

Well, I am going to try and explain this the way it is in my head. So I am sorry for the result that ends up on here, lol.

But if New Jersey and I.K. both claim that this isn't to circumvent the salary cap and the are adament about I.K. being able to play until 44 years old. Would they have any problem reversing the contract so that the first 5 years of the contract I.K. is making 550K and has to wait until he is 44 to get his big pay day? Think NJ would go for that since they would be confident in I.K. playing until that age?

 

[BostonAJ]

I read about a prospective solution to this problem...

Don't let any year's salary pass 20% higher or lower beyond whatever the cap hit is.

Kovalchuk's contract is 6M Cap hit, so therefore he can't make any more than 7.2M and no less than 4.8M

Reports indicate that if you remove the final 4 years of his contract, his cap hit goes from 6M to 8.5M. Thats how far the cap is being manipulated in this deal.

 

[h X c Chris]

Devils got too greedy. End of story. There are plenty of solutions that the NHL can come up with to stop all the madness, I do like BostonAJ's solution though. Contracts should not be able to go from millions to thousands in 1 season.

 

[devs30rko]

everyone has failed to state 1 BIG thing on this thread...
as much as i'm sure people will declare me biased being a devils fan and all but people have skipped some extremely important facts here.

most of us, including myself, SPECULATE that he won't play til he is 44.

but show me how you KNOW he won't play til then.

because that is what the NHL needs to prove. they need to prove that they KNOW he won't play until he is 44, when over the past several years a couple contracts only 2 years different have gotten through.

 

[puckhead]

everyone has failed to state 1 BIG thing on this thread...
as much as i'm sure people will declare me biased being a devils fan and all but people have skipped some extremely important facts here.

most of us, including myself, SPECULATE that he won't play til he is 44.

but show me how you KNOW he won't play til then.

because that is what the NHL needs to prove. they need to prove that they KNOW he won't play until he is 44, when over the past several years a couple contracts only 2 years different have gotten through.

no they don't. this isn't a criminal trial.
I'm no lawyer, but I think the wording they would use would be something like "the contract has shown intent to circumnavigate the cap". generally, contract law is what a "reasonable man" can be expected to read from the situation. They don't need to prove shit.

the easy answer to that is: OK Ilya, if you have full intent to play out the duration of the contract, then you wouldn't mind moving several million from the first few years to the last few years.