Luongo's deal under investigation

[Forty_Sixand2]

ya you can add mike richards in there with the reasonable crowd.. really dipietro's was reasonable too.. he was what, 23 and signed a 15 year deal?.. that one is biting the isles in the ass though

what i dont understand is what they plan on doing if the determine luongo's was cap circumvention? its good that they have precedent to eliminate these type of deals going forward (its bad for the game), but they cant terminate a deal thats already been approved, signed, and is in progress..

...can they?

I agree with this 100%. I do not like the idea that an organization can reject a previously approved contract after the fact. That seems out of line.

(also I know i owe a video, expect two today)

 

[awaz]

I agree with this 100%. I do not like the idea that an organization can reject a previously approved contract after the fact. That seems out of line.

(also I know i owe a video, expect two today)

ha no worries.. i'll be sure to watch both 'em when i get home

 

[mattola]

I could see lawsuits coming. if Luongos gets rejected then Hossas gets rejected and if hossas gets rejected then well he shouldn't have been playing for the hawks and scored the OT against Nashville and winning that game to tie the series... the landslide that could come from this would be devastating. I dont believe anything will happen to any contracts that have ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE NHL......... remember that Gary.. ALREADY APPROVED... the Devils deal was rejected immediately.

 

[awaz]

I could see lawsuits coming. if Luongos gets rejected then Hossas gets rejected and if hossas gets rejected then well he shouldn't have been playing for the hawks and scored the OT against Nashville and winning that game to tie the series... the landslide that could come from this would be devastating. I dont believe anything will happen to any contracts that have ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE NHL......... remember that Gary.. ALREADY APPROVED... the Devils deal was rejected immediately.

that says it all.

 

[beantownmaniac]

I don't see how the league can investigate deals that are already approved. I'm not saying I like some of these deals, but they had the chance when the deals were first made, they let them go through.

 

[ELYEAH82]

I can see how they can negate them prior to the deal starting, but IMO if the extension is already going then they remain. So Hossa is already going but several others are not.

 

[dash]

Put me in the camp that wants the current Bobby Lou cap hit on the books to remain in place for as long as possible.

 

[puckhead]

next CBA heres a compromise......

the nhl gets its contract length limit.... say 10 years

the nhlpa gets a clause that once a contract is registered its FINAL no going back on it for either side.


otherwise Gary is gonna run this league like its fucking auschwitz

I don't think contract length is an issue. If you want to lock a guy up for life, and he's happy with that too, then go for it.
the issue is (and should be) variance of salary. they thought that they had addressed with the "salary can't go down by more than half clause", but clearly they did not. So that needs to be changed to read "any single annual salary cannot diverge from the average annual contract value by more than ____ %"

 

[postmaster]

Put me in the camp that wants the current Bobby Lou cap hit on the books to remain in place for as long as possible.

When did you become a Chicago fan dash?

 

[dash]

When did you become a Chicago fan dash?

Well, they do have the best looking jerseys in the league...

 

[postmaster]

Well, they do have the best looking jerseys in the league...

Total BS, we all know the winged wheel is the best.

 

[dash]

Total BS, we all know the winged wheel is the best.

You put all the wrong glasses this morning my friend (homer glasses instead of mod glasses, hee hee)

 

[HonusWagner66]

I actually like the Habs' jerseys the best. Chicago would be #2 and Detroit #4 behind Toronto...

 

[HonusWagner66]

ya you can add mike richards in there with the reasonable crowd.. really dipietro's was reasonable too.. he was what, 23 and signed a 15 year deal?.. that one is biting the isles in the ass though

what i dont understand is what they plan on doing if the determine luongo's was cap circumvention? its good that they have precedent to eliminate these type of deals going forward (its bad for the game), but they cant terminate a deal thats already been approved, signed, and is in progress..

...can they?

I think that they should look into long term deals but ones like the Ovie and Backstrom one are actually reasonable if you think about it.

Ovechkin signed a 13 year deal at the age of 22 meaning he will be 35 at the end of it.

Backstrom signed a 10 year deal at the age of 23 meaning he will be 33 at the end of it.

Both of them will still be in the latter section of their prime at the end of these deals and I do not see the contracts as set up to circumvent the cap. If a young player wants long term stability and a team is willing to commit to them I do not have a problem with it. Maybe there should be a sliding scale of contract length limit based on the age of the player I aonly know examples of Caps deals but I am sure that there are other examples for other teams.

Yeah Kovalchuk being 44 at the end of the deal was apparently a big issue with the league and the arbitrator. That's not apparently a realistic playing age.

And the other main issue was what they called "backdive," which is decreased payments over the final years.

OV doesn't belong in the conversation because his salary doesn't drop off at all at the end of the deal. He has a $9.5 million+ cap hit. No circumvention here, just a long deal.

Same with Backstrom. His final year of the contract is actually his highest annual salary.

Richard's last two years are only slightly lower than other years. So no issue with him either.

 

[HonusWagner66]

I don't think there should be a term limit put in place in the next CBA, just something to stop the "backdive" to lower cap hits. If someone wants to pay a player $10 million a year for 17 years, fine. But they shouldn't be able to pay him $10 million for 10 years and $550,000 for 7 years just to lower the cap hit.

 

[dash]

If Kovy signs the same 17 year, $102 million contract with the Thrashers, does the league raise a stink? Just my opinion, but I don't think the league evens bats an eye if that happens.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

No matter what happens with these other contracts the league needs to make it clear that these deals will no longer be accepted. I hope in the next bargaining agreement it's made clear that all contracts are dollar for dollar deals. The salary & the cap hit should be the same.

 

[davnlaguna]

I don't think they would void any contracts that players are already playing under. Pronger and Luongo contracts could get voided as I don't think they have started yet.
As far as the rest I would guess if the NHL doesn't like them the team could lose draft picks. I don't think cap hit fines would take place because the league wants to play nice with the NHLPA right now and taking money off the table is not in anyones interest.

 

[dare2be]

I don't get it. The Luongo and Hossa deals were already investigated by the league when they were first signed.

Also, I've said this before, but the simplest fix to the problem is to not allow the difference between the max and min salary years to be greater than the cap hit. It gives enough flexibility for anticipated diminishing returns without allowing a wash out at the end of the contract.

 

[Vadered]

I don't think they would void any contracts that players are already playing under. Pronger and Luongo contracts could get voided as I don't think they have started yet.
As far as the rest I would guess if the NHL doesn't like them the team could lose draft picks. I don't think cap hit fines would take place because the league wants to play nice with the NHLPA right now and taking money off the table is not in anyones interest.

Don't think the Pronger one really needs to be investigated though. He's over 35 as of the contract extension taking effect, so if he retires, it stays on the books. I guess you could argue that 5 million per year for 7 years is better than 6.5 million per for 5 years (it allows you to stack the team a bit more in the first five years), but I'd rather not have an empty seat on the bench suck up a tenth of my cap space those last two years.

Also, there's a long history of defensemen playing to the age of 42, so it's really possible that Pronger could still be playing for us at that point. I really don't think the Flyers would have a problem restructuring the contract so that some of the money ends up at the back end, either.