National Hockey League 2010-2011

[U2Fan101]

Let's get this started on the hottest topic -

Arbitrator backs league's rejection of Devils/Kovalchuk contract.

I'm a HUGE Devils fan.

'm as surprised as any Devils fan about this. And I'm as pissed as all of you are.

I've been trying to find some sense to all of this, and the ONLY reason that I could PLAUSIBLY see as to why Bloch(head) ruled in favor of the league is the length of the contract. Any other reason I'd call bullshit on.

I do remember when Hossa and Pronger were signed the league investigated those signings and I think they pushed the envelope, but the Devils, we crossed the line. Do I think it's wrong? Yes. Do I think it's unfair? Of course. Do I think the league is out to keep the Devils down? No.

Getting my anger aside and trying to be realistic here, if anyone signed a 17-year contract in the same manner as Kovalchuk, I think the league would have done the exact same thing to that team.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Sadly, I'm an Islander fan, but my buddy is a Devil fan. This is a horseshit decision.

 

[U2Fan101]

Thank you. Seems like Devils and Islanders fans get along - we have the same mutual enemy - the flippin' Rangers!

First of all, this "spirit of the CBA" nonsense comment by Bloch should not count. Second, there was a great point made by some journalist that I think should lead to a lawsuit between the NHLPA and the league. He basically mentioned how the NHLPA refused to agree to a CBA with any kind of contract length limits, and that this was a deal-breaker. Effectively, this ruling allows the NHL to put any kind of artificial contract length limits they want simply by arguing with their catch-all clause.

In other words, back during the lockout, the NHLPA refused to sign a contract that had any kind of contract length limits. When the league gave in, that was a deal-breaker and the NHLPA signed the CBA.

With this rejection and ruling by the arbitrator, the league is basically, in effect, putting a limit on the contract length because it circumvents the “spirit of the CBA”, when that was the deal-breaker that allowed the NHLPA to sign the CBA, once the league removed the contract length limit.

And now they are investigating the other contracts (Luongo, Savard, Pronger, Hossa), to make them unofficial and have them become free agents, and if it turns out Hossa's contract is void and circumvents the CBA, then Bettman has the right to take the Stanley Cup away from the Blackhawks, since technically he wouldn't have been on the roster.

This whole thing is turning into a mess and I'm not sure who I'm madder at - Bettman, the league, or the owners.

Mark my words- there will be no season 2011-2012. The NHLPA will get that former MLB union head and the NHLPA will get strong again.

 

[BoMac]

With this rejection and ruling by the arbitrator, the league is basically, in effect, putting a limit on the contract length because it circumvents the “spirit of the CBA”, when that was the deal-breaker that allowed the NHLPA to sign the CBA, once the league removed the contract length limit.

Except the league is not arguing against the 17-year term of Kovy's deal, but rather the huge salary drop in the last 6 years which would then give the team a lower cap hit.

 

[No spoken words]

And I'm as pissed as all of you are.

I'm not pissed about it at all, sorry. It was a bogus deal and I'm glad that it was rejected and that the arbitration case was won by the league.

My only criticism of the league is that it took them this long to start fighting against such contracts. But better late than never.

I'm an Islander fan as well, and while my dislike of the Rangers is stronger than that which I have for any other team, I have no love for the Devils at all.

 

[U2Fan101]

I'm an Islander fan as well, and while my dislike of the Rangers is stronger than that which I have for any other team, I have no love for the Devils at all.

You speak words of war, Islanders fan. I like the Islanders. It's on!

 

[No spoken words]

Sadly, Islander fans have nothing to say to anyone about anything, since we haven't won a playoff series in 17 years.

 

[BoMac]

I'm not sorry that a certain team started that streak.

 

[Chizip]

i dont see how anyone can be pissed that the contract was voided

it was clearly a cap circumvention

 

[U2Fan101]

It wasn't clearly a cap circumvention. Bloch even stated in his ruling that the Devils didn't do anything wrong, but the intent was there.

So bassically from a legal standpoint they didn't circumvent the cap but from a practical standpoint they did.

So, what is it Bloch(head), are we looking at legalities or gut feelings? That's where I'm pissed because his report is contradicting in and of itself.

And NOW other contracts need to be investigated and if need be, made void and unregistered too.

 

[coolian2]

with no articles linked, what's the issue here?

is it the contract was massively backloaded/frontloaded?

 

[U2Fan101]

The Luongo, Hossa, Pronger and Savard contracts are being investigated per the arbitrator's rulings.

With the Hossa contract, if his contract is found to be cap circumvention, Bettman has the ability to take the Stanley Cup away from the Blackhawks since technically he shouldn't have been part of the roster.

I hate Bettman.

The league is the Empire.
Bettman is Darth Vader.
The NHLPA is the Rebellion.
The Devils are the main heroes.
Lou is Obi-Wan.
Darth Vader just struck down Obi-Wan.
And Boba Fett is the Bloch, the arbitrator. He joined the wrong side.

And now the evil empire is going after other rebel alliance members.

It's time to kick ass and blow-up their death star and get rid of Darth Bettman.

 

[U2Fan101]

with no articles linked, what's the issue here?

is it the contract was massively backloaded/frontloaded?

Report: NHL checking Luongo's deal among other contracts

 

[BoMac]

with no articles linked, what's the issue here?

is it the contract was massively backloaded/frontloaded?

It was massively front loaded.

The NHL's salary cap is as follows: each team has to reach a minimum of $43.4 million in salaries or a maximum of $59.4 million for the 2010-2011 season.

The cap hit, or the amount of a contract that counts against the cap, is the average salary over the life of that contract. So the cap hit for Kovalchuk's contract over 17 years was $6 million. However, he was slated to receive $95 million over the first 10 years of the contract and just $7 million over the last seven years.

Additionally, at 27 years old, Kovalchuk would be 44 when the contract expires. If he would decide to retire after age 35, then the New Jersey Devils would be off the hook for his salary AND the contract does not count against the cap.

The NHL says the Devils negotiated the contract in "bad faith", which in the CBA is grounds for nullification of contracts, and it's hard to argue against that.

 

[U2Fan101]

It was massively front loaded.

I agree it was massively front loaded. In that article I posted, Bloch states:

"Each of these players will be 40 or over at the end of the contract term and each contract includes dramatic divebacks," Bloch wrote in his ruling. "Pronger's annual salary, for example, drops from $4,000,000 to $525,000 at the point he is earning almost 97% of the total $34,450,000 salary.

"Roberto Luongo, with Vancouver, has a 12- year agreement that will end when he is 43. After averaging some $7,000,000 per year for the first nine years of the Agreement, Luongo will receive an average of about 1.2 million during his last 3 years, amounting to some 5.7% of the total compensation during that time period."

Frankly, it is consistent. if you're going to void Kovalchuk's contract, the investigation needs to happen on Pronger's and Luongo's front loaded contract. And to be fully consistent, these two contracts need to be voided for the same argument Kovalchuk's was since these were done as a way to get under the cap as well.

If they're not voided, then there is drastic inconsistent and unfairness being done to the Devils. All front loaded, all drop considerably in the last year, and all designed to get under the cap.

That being said though, I don't think these contracts should be voided, just like I think the arbitrator ruled incorrectly - legally they didn't circumvent the CBA, whether the gut feeling or the intent was there, they didn't LEGALLY do anything wrong.

 

[UberBeaver]

I'm not pissed about it at all, sorry. It was a bogus deal and I'm glad that it was rejected and that the arbitration case was won by the league.

My only criticism of the league is that it took them this long to start fighting against such contracts. But better late than never.

I'm an Islander fan as well, and while my dislike of the Rangers is stronger than that which I have for any other team, I have no love for the Devils at all.

I agree with all of this. I actually went to THE ROCK and those people sucked balls. Probably didn't help that the Devils destroyed the Islanders that day (6-1 or something awful) but still. Some fat woman scoffed at my two year old daughter for wearing an Islander's jersey. Slob.

The deal was ridiculous and even Lou Lamorillo (who I really like) somewhat sort of admitted he thought it was a joke. This should have stopped with Hossa.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

It was massively front loaded.

The NHL's salary cap is as follows: each team has to reach a minimum of $43.4 million in salaries or a maximum of $59.4 million for the 2010-2011 season.

The cap hit, or the amount of a contract that counts against the cap, is the average salary over the life of that contract. So the cap hit for Kovalchuk's contract over 17 years was $6 million. However, he was slated to receive $95 million over the first 10 years of the contract and just $7 million over the last seven years.

Additionally, at 27 years old, Kovalchuk would be 44 when the contract expires. If he would decide to retire after age 35, then the New Jersey Devils would be off the hook for his salary AND the contract does not count against the cap.

The NHL says the Devils negotiated the contract in "bad faith", which in the CBA is grounds for nullification of contracts, and it's hard to argue against that.

Here is a previous post I made in the other thread:

...here is the reported breakdown of Kovy's contract:

2010-2011: $6 million
2011-2012: $6 million
2012-2013: $11.5 million
2013-2014: $11.5 million
2014-2015: $11.5 million
2015-2016: $11.5 million
2016-2017: $11.5 million
2017-2018: $10.5 million
2018-2019: $8.5 million
2019-2020: $6.5 million
2020-2021: $3.5 million
2021-2022: $750,000
2022-2023: $550,000
2023-2024: $550,000
2024-2025: $550,000
2025-2026: $550,000
2026-2027: $550,000

they clearly made this contract knowing that he would not be around for the last 6 years...

 

[BoMac]

they clearly made this contract knowing that he would not be around for the last 6 years...

As much as it pains me to agree with scum like you, here is a comparison of some of the longest contracts:

Rick DiPietro, New York Islanders
Signed Sept. 2006
15 years, $67.5 million

2006-2007: $4.5 million
​

2007-2008: $4.5 million
2008-2009: $4.5 million
2009-2010: $4.5 million
2010-2011: $4.5 million
2011-2012: $4.5 million
2012-2013: $4.5 million
2013-2014: $4.5 million
2014-2015: $4.5 million
2015-2016: $4.5 million
2016-2017: $4.5 million
2017-2018: $4.5 million
2018-2019: $4.5 million
2019-2020: $4.5 million
2020-2021: $4.5 million


Alexander Ovechkin, Washington Capitals
Signed: January 2008
13 years, $124 million

2008-2009: $9 million
2009-2010: $9 million
2010-2011: $9 million
2011-2012: $9 million
2012-2013: $9 million
2013-2014: $9 million
2014-2015: $10 million
2015-2016: $10 million
2016-2017: $10 million
2017-2018: $10 million
2018-2019: $10 million
2019-2020: $10 million
2020-2021: $10 million



So while we're on the topic of the Islanders and term limits, you can see that while DiPietro's deal is 15 years, the salary remains consistent throughout. Similarly, Ovechkin's deal actually increases later in the contract. Therefore, you can obviously see how Lamoriello and Kovalchuk attempted to circumvent the salary cap, and how the NHL deems it was negotiated in "bad faith", which is a term specifically stated in the CBA as grounds for nullification of a contract.

 

[U2Fan101]

The deal was ridiculous and even Lou Lamorillo (who I really like) somewhat sort of admitted he thought it was a joke. This should have stopped with Hossa.

Agreed. In fact, Lou has gone on to say how he hates long-term contracts. Part of me wonders if he did this on purpose to get the league to stop approving these long-term contracts.

 

[U2Fan101]

As much as it pains me to agree with scum like you, here is a comparison of some of the longest contracts:

Rick DiPietro, New York Islanders
Signed Sept. 2006
15 years, $67.5 million

2006-2007: $4.5 million
​

2007-2008: $4.5 million
2008-2009: $4.5 million
2009-2010: $4.5 million
2010-2011: $4.5 million
2011-2012: $4.5 million
2012-2013: $4.5 million
2013-2014: $4.5 million
2014-2015: $4.5 million
2015-2016: $4.5 million
2016-2017: $4.5 million
2017-2018: $4.5 million
2018-2019: $4.5 million
2019-2020: $4.5 million
2020-2021: $4.5 million


Alexander Ovechkin, Washington Capitals
Signed: January 2008
13 years, $124 million

2008-2009: $9 million
2009-2010: $9 million
2010-2011: $9 million
2011-2012: $9 million
2012-2013: $9 million
2013-2014: $9 million
2014-2015: $10 million
2015-2016: $10 million
2016-2017: $10 million
2017-2018: $10 million
2018-2019: $10 million
2019-2020: $10 million
2020-2021: $10 million



So while we're on the topic of the Islanders and term limits, you can see that while DiPietro's deal is 15 years, the salary remains consistent throughout. Similarly, Ovechkin's deal actually increases later in the contract. Therefore, you can obviously see how Lamoriello and Kovalchuk attempted to circumvent the salary cap, and how the NHL deems it was negotiated in "bad faith", which is a term specifically stated in the CBA as grounds for nullification of a contract.

I agree with your comparison of DiPietro's and Ovechkin's contracts. But if you're going to void the contract on Lou and Kovie you have to do the same for Pronger's and Luongo's. They drop drastically just like Kovie's contract in the last few years and they both go past the age of 40.

Consistency is all I'm asking for here. The league won't void their contracts though. I think this 'investigation' is just being done to appease Lou.

 

[U2Fan101]

If anyone wants to read the 20-page report from the arbitrator.

Quite a great read.

Arbitrator's Ruling.

 

[Chizip]

While Hossa and Pronger's contracts are ridiculous as well, Kovie's contract took it to another level where the NHL finally had to step in and do something to prevent more of these kind of contracts in the future.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

THE HOSS!

 

[liz9640]

The Luongo, Hossa, Pronger and Savard contracts are being investigated per the arbitrator's rulings.

With the Hossa contract, if his contract is found to be cap circumvention, Bettman has the ability to take the Stanley Cup away from the Blackhawks since technically he shouldn't have been part of the roster.

I hate Bettman.
.

If I remember right, didn't the NHL look at the Hossa contract last year??

The Zetterberg and Franzen contracts are not being looked at so I'm happy.

Bettman does need to go away, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
I was disapointed in the amount of booing he got from Flyers fans this past season. At least it didn't come across that loud on TV. We boo'd him so loudly in Detroit the season before I couldn't hear a damn word he was saying. Not sure how is translated on TV since I haven't brought myself to watch the game yet. At this point I figure I was there so I don't want to see it again.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

what the hell was that? fucking Kaberle....

 

[BoMac]

It's not his fault that Ferguson gave everyone and their mother a no trade clause.

 

[u2popmofo]

what the hell was that? fucking Kaberle....

No one cares about your opinions when you dress like this.

Friggin' Elfa.

 

[UberBeaver]

what the hell was that? fucking Kaberle....

Burke is gonna deal him at the deadline for a better haul. Kaberle will go to a contender, so he'll be happy. Burke will either get picks or prospects, so he'll be happy.

 

[BoMac]

Burke is gonna deal him at the deadline for a better haul. Kaberle will go to a contender, so he'll be happy. Burke will either get picks or prospects, so he'll be happy.

Burke wants a Top 6 forward, which is why he says he didn't deal Kaberle.

 

[Flaming_C]

But will Kaberle waive his NTC at the trade deadline? He hasn't in the past, so I cannot see him waiving it this year.