Buds Board Keepers League

Yup, gonzo.. Lee the new guy is in the building!!

What?

Deal rejected by NHL for cap circumvention.

inferno31 wroteCOLONDeal rejected by NHL for cap circumvention.

Insane. And stupid on the league's part. They made their bed with the CBA and now they're trying to change it mid-run.

Great for the Leafs though. Burke wouldn't take advantage of this type of deal so it's nice that the competition can't either.

I wonder if Kovalchuk takes a 1-year deal with the Devils now. Or possibly goes to the KHL? Wouldn't that be a laugh.

inferno31 wroteCOLONDeal rejected by NHL for cap circumvention.

BOOM. this is what i was saying neel.

There is a 50% rule apparently. That salary can only decrease by 50% at most each year. Its my belief the league stuck them with that. They will restructure the deal I'm sure.

inferno31 wroteCOLONThere is a 50% rule apparently. That salary can only decrease by 50% at most each year. Its my belief the league stuck them with that. They will restructure the deal I'm sure.

its not just that Neel. like i said earlier it has to do with Kovys deal extending 5 more years after he turns 40. thats absolutely ridiculous. they tried to give the guy OV/Crosby money for 12 years, while having a contract = zetterberg's cap hit. its fucking bullshit.

inferno31 wroteCOLONThere is a 50% rule apparently. That salary can only decrease by 50% at most each year. Its my belief the league stuck them with that. They will restructure the deal I'm sure.

i've read others mentioned this, however its simply not true.

I don't understand though what rule has been "officially" broken? Why did the other contracts go through but the line drawn here?

inferno31 wroteCOLONI don't understand though what rule has been "officially" broken? Why did the other contracts go through but the line drawn here?

they must consider that there is no plan to actually play out this contract = cap circumvention.

inferno31 wroteCOLONI don't understand though what rule has been "officially" broken? Why did the other contracts go through but the line drawn here?

facey wroteCOLONthey must consider that there is no plan to actually play out this contract = cap circumvention.

exactly. this is about a contract with "ghost" years at the end. the pronger/hossa contracts went a little far too but it was till about ~41 years of age. this contract takes it to a whole new level by adding about ~5 years on TOP of the average retirement age.

when the pronger/hossa contracts happened they began investigations but there was really no way to stop those contracts once the terms began. those contracts were a prelude to this decision. the next cba will have a DISTINCT age cap when it comes to contracts.

with the kovy contract, EVERYONE knows he will probably retire around 39-40 when he has been paid 98% of his contract.

Other than "knowing" per say that he won't honor it which you can't prove, I still don't see what rule was broken. Others took it to 41-42 this goes to 44. I'm just slightly confused if they could show an actual rule that was broken that'd be interesting.
This could go to arbitration, in which case I think the NHL would be up against Fehr and the NHLPA in how they can prove that this is against the rules.

Side Note: Because of escrow I read an interesting article these deals steal money from every player to the tune of 10000-20000 yearly. Big money for some of the guys for sure.

the NHLPA/escrow fund covered this years raise... to be fair to this years groups of free agents.

facey wroteCOLONthe NHLPA/escrow fund covered this years raise... to be fair to this years groups of free agents.

Agreed. But the fact that these kinds of deals steal more money now and retire when they'd be taking less (as escrow is based on amount paid out not cap), it hurts lower tier players.

the rule that is broken Neel is that 99% of players retire before they are 42. like i said the pronger/hossa contracts serve has a prelude to this decision (i.e. if they were made today, they may have been overruled as well). if they allow this, whats to say, Crosby when his contract expires in a few years, wont be signed till hes 49 at a cap his of 6.5m? the concept of signing a player only until he is capable of playing can be enforced despite having a clear cut line that says so as the nature of the law is codified through the implication of other rules.

SuperMario wroteCOLONthe rule that is broken Neel is that 99% of players retire before they are 42. like i said the pronger/hossa contracts serve has a prelude to this decision (i.e. if they were made today, they may have been overruled as well). if they allow this, whats to say, Crosby when his contract expires in a few years, wont be signed till hes 49 at a cap his of 6.5m? the concept of signing a player only until he is capable of playing can be enforced despite having a clear cut line that says so as the nature of the law is codified through the implication of other rules.

See this "rule" is only suggested in the implication of other rules. Its interesting the NBA's CBA says it can veto a deal if it goes against the "intentions" of the rules, the NHL does not have this rule in their CBA.
Your arguing that because most guys don't play that long this deal isn't logical, which I agree with. However because its illogical, or against the "intentions" of other rules, does not according to the NHL's CBA make it it illegal, which is my point.
What is the NHL arguing? Besides that this is obvious circumvention but not clearly against a specific rule. What are you enforcing? I think if the PA appeals this would be very interesting.

inferno31 wroteCOLON
See this "rule" is only suggested in the implication of other rules. Its interesting the NBA's CBA says it can veto a deal if it goes against the "intentions" of the rules, the NHL does not have this rule in their CBA.
Your arguing that because most guys don't play that long this deal isn't logical, which I agree with. However because its illogical, or against the "intentions" of other rules, does not according to the NHL's CBA make it it illegal, which is my point.
What is the NHL arguing? Besides that this is obvious circumvention but not clearly against a specific rule. What are you enforcing? I think if the PA appeals this would be very interesting.

i think the PA will appeal it. but i still think the NHL wins this. rules are ALWAYs open to interpretation when something ambigious comes up. not everything that is not codified as illegal is automatically legal, if you follow me. a line has to be drawn.

because i ask again, what if tmrw, the kings offer kovy a 25 year deal, where the first 10 years receive 120 million total and the remaining 15 receive 10m. that would be a 130m deal with an annual cap hit of 5.2. What's the difference? In the codification, interpretation and implementation of laws, a line has to be drawn when it comes to issues that are a matter of degree. so you cannot use the pronger/hossa deals as a form of precedent in this case because the counter to that argument would simply be can a 25 year deal be signed by kovy for an annual hit of a lower amount. Where do you draw the line? NHL will win it hands down imo.

SuperMario wroteCOLON
i think the PA will appeal it. but i still think the NHL wins this. rules are ALWAYs open to interpretation when something ambigious comes up. not everything that is not codified as illegal is automatically legal, if you follow me. a line has to be drawn.

because i ask again, what if tmrw, the kings offer kovy a 25 year deal, where the first 10 years receive 120 million total and the remaining 15 receive 10m. that would be a 130m deal with an annual cap hit of 5.2. What's the difference? In the codification, interpretation and implementation of laws, a line has to be drawn when it comes to issues that are a matter of degree. so you cannot use the pronger/hossa deals as a form of precedent in this case because the counter to that argument would simply be can a 25 year deal be signed by kovy for an annual hit of a lower amount. Where do you draw the line? NHL will win it hands down imo.

I follow what your saying, but if Donald Fehr gets involved I'd back the PA to win this.
Its much harder to prove a rule is being broken when its not written, especially when they don't have the clause that the NBA has. The NHL would be arguing that its illegal because it is at heart, where the PA would be saying show me the law that was broken. A fair arbitrator I think would be difficult. On that topic the PA and NHL haven't agreed on arbitrator in 5 years.

Again I know what your saying regards to codification, interpretation and implementation but the NBA specifically put in a clause with that regard, the NHL did not. The way it reads is the CBA is bond, and a binding agreement if you can't point a specific line that was violated I'm not sure an arbitrator will agree.
I honestly think the NHL is right though, and it is bullshit I'm just not sure they'd win a case if it goes to it. I think the Devils will likely rework something before arbitration.

inferno31 wroteCOLON
I follow what your saying, but if Donald Fehr gets involved I'd back the PA to win this.
Its much harder to prove a rule is being broken when its not written, especially when they don't have the clause that the NBA has. The NHL would be arguing that its illegal because it is at heart, where the PA would be saying show me the law that was broken. A fair arbitrator I think would be difficult. On that topic the PA and NHL haven't agreed on arbitrator in 5 years.

Again I know what your saying regards to codification, interpretation and implementation but the NBA specifically put in a clause with that regard, the NHL did not. The way it reads is the CBA is bond, and a binding agreement if you can't point a specific line that was violated I'm not sure an arbitrator will agree.
I honestly think the NHL is right though, and it is bullshit I'm just not sure they'd win a case if it goes to it. I think the Devils will likely rework something before arbitration.

yup i hope either kovy gets screwed or someone has to take the 9m cap hit that is needed for the contract he wants. simple as that.

Lou wants him and Parise, I wonder how he'll structure this now. Maybe till 42 rather than 44, NHL would likely let that slide.