Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
DevsFan7545

New Kovy Update ("As the Kovy Turns")

12,307 posts in this topic

If the contract eventually gets approved, then I'll give the league a 'pass', as I'll view this more as a warning than the league actually trying to stop it. A slap on the wrist, if you will.

Contracts like this are definitely approaching the limit obviously. They definitely should be stopped. Even if this didn't involve the devils I'd still be against the league, because it's just not that different imo. If kovy were older, or there were more years/less money attached I'd be singing a different tune.

Wouldn't a contract taking a player to 46 and having 6 or 7 years at league minimum then be ok because it wasn't that different from this one? Assuming this one gains approval.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lets keeping winning stanley cups then and stick it in everyone's craw. screw the league. we are jersey's team not bettman's chew toy

Absolutly :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$550,000 or 1 mill is not that big of a difference in terms of dollars....we all know that all of the players are not going to play out the contracts, it was a loophole and teams exposed it...

it's a big difference when you consider what money players play for at that age. how much do you think mike modano signed for? brendan shanahan signed for $800,000 when he signed with NJ the first time, and his second contract was $1 million. mark recchi is signed for $1 million in base salary and $950,000 in bonuses. i don't think that zetterberg, hossa, etc. will finish out their contracts either, but it looks more plausible that they would - their final years, they're being paid around what players of their age are paid when they are playing.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.... kovalchuk, by contrast, has 5 years at $550,000.

You see, he will only be doing 550k worth of work those years. That's what makes it ok. He will not be getting the icetime in his 40's that he will get in his 30's which will drop from his 20's ice time too.

simple really.

koolaid.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know that is true; I am sure most fans feel the league is against their team. Maybe the league is going after the ocntract because of the blatant attempt to circumvent the cap... why this contract as opposed to some of the others I don't know, but I don't believe there is a conspiracy to bone the Devils

No, but I can guarantee you if the Kings, Penguins, Blackhawks, Rangers, Detroit, or some other team the league likes seeing on NBC every weekend had done the same exact deal, it would not have been rejected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He will not be getting the icetime in his 40's that he will get in his 30's

I don't think you get any ice time after you retire, so it'll definitely be a lot less. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't a contract taking a player to 46 and having 6 or 7 years at league minimum then be ok because it wasn't that different from this one? Assuming this one gains approval.

Fair enough, that's a good point. I guess the underlying question is where exactly does this 'line' lay. In my opinion, Kovy's is just below it.

Although, I think the fact that the league fought this particular contract does put a sort of taboo on trying to pass an even more lengthy/expensive contract in the future. They made a big fuss about this one, and none of the previous ones.

And, if this turns out to actually be the case, I guess it's a mission accomplished by the league, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but I can guarantee you if the Kings, Penguins, Blackhawks, Rangers, Detroit, or some other team the league likes seeing on NBC every weekend had done the same exact deal, it would not have been rejected.

of course. the league hates the devils. just like they forced new jersey to eat malakhov and mogilny's contracts. or didn't really look into the fact that richard matvichuk just happened to come back from his back injury until the last game of the season.

(lol @ putting the kings on this list - yeah national television loves the LA kings)

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

500k or twice as much, are both pretty large amounts. Over 5 years that works out to 2.5 million dollars, no drop in the bucket.

In the grand scheme of these massive $80-$100 mill contracts, 2.5 mill IS a drop in the bucket....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have been waiting to use this saying in a sentence for a while now "stick it in everyone's craw" :dance:

And I'm glad you finally found a conversation to insert that epic phrase into :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep, it's totally a marketing machine. That's why they're so upset Kovy signed with us. They don't want to put an unfamiliar team on national television, unless they suck and get pounded by an original six, or someone else just as "good" all about ratings.

They have to work harder to capitalize on Kovy being in Jersey. it's not a given, and they don't like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the other contracts were very similar. As someone posted earlier in one of the many lengthy Kovy threads, it is like a police officer watching someone go by doing 74 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, and then pulling over the guy going 76 MPH in that same zone...yes the Kovy contract was a little different, but not by much....

Just to give due credit, it was SI's Michael Farber who said it:

Like a lenient parent, the NHL's previous tolerance for cap manipulation has moved, in a perfectly logical and possibly legal direction, to the Kovalchuk deal. The league had a chance to take a stand against Roberto Luongo's contract with the Canucks. (His 12-year extension, which expires in 2021-22, pays him $1 million each in the final two seasons, when he is 41 and 42. He makes $10 million this season.) The league could have bridled at Pronger's deal with the Flyers, which drops to $525,000 the final two years before he qualifies for unrestricted free agency in 2017-18, just prior to his 43rd birthday. Marian Hossa's deal in Chicago, $7.9 million now but $750,000 the last two years when theoretically he retires after the 2020-21 season at age 42, was even more of a stretch given the position he plays, but the NHL considered these deals merely pushing the envelope but not quite overstuffing it.

The other teams were doing 74 in a 65 mile-per-hour zone, but when the Devils did 76, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly turned on his siren and flashed his red light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the grand scheme of these massive $80-$100 mill contracts, 2.5 mill IS a drop in the bucket....

It's still 2.5 million dollars. A reasonable person isn't going to look at 2.5 million dollars and say it's no big deal, especially when the crux of this issue is splitting hairs.

If I have 100 million dollars and go and gamble away 2.5 million of it, I'm PO'ed, I believe.

2.5% extra return on my stock portfolio is a big deal too.

I get what you're saying, that it's not big relative to the rest of the contract, but I just think the absolute terms of 2.5% or 2.5 million dollars are a big deal to a contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to give due credit, it was SI's Michael Farber who said it:

It was a really bad analogy for his point actually, IMO.

In his scenario he is saying all the teams broke the law and the Devils are the ones caught and going to be punished for it because they broke it the worst....but the whole rest of the article suggests he believes since everyone may have been breaking the rules the Devils aren't going to be punished either, which doesn't fit this scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still 2.5 million dollars. A reasonable person isn't going to look at 2.5 million dollars and say it's no big deal, especially when the crux of this issue is splitting hairs.

If I have 100 million dollars and go and gamble away 2.5 million of it, I'm PO'ed, I believe.

2.5% extra return on my stock portfolio is a big deal too.

I get what you're saying, that it's not big relative to the rest of the contract, but I just think the absolute terms of 2.5% or 2.5 million dollars are a big deal to a contract.

How mad could you REALLY be if you gambled away 2.5 mill and only had 97.5 mill remaining....

It was a really bad analogy for his point actually, IMO.

In his scenario he is saying all the teams broke the law and the Devils are the ones caught and going to be punished for it because they broke it the worst....but the whole rest of the article suggests he believes since everyone may have been breaking the rules the Devils aren't going to be punished either, which doesn't fit this scenario.

I thought the analogy was good, you can't take it literally. Yes in the speeding scenario a law is being broken, however it appears that the Devils were just smart about what they did, and no "law" was broken....

Edited by ThreeCups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How mad could you REALLY be if you gambled away 2.5 mill and only had 97.5 mill remaining....

I can only hope to some day find out :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of course. the league hates the devils. just like they forced new jersey to eat malakhov and mogilny's contracts. or didn't really look into the fact that richard matvichuk just happened to come back from his back injury until the last game of the season.

(lol @ putting the kings on this list - yeah national television loves the LA kings)

It's not animus against the Devils, so much as looking the other way when it comes to teams that are more marketable.

LA is a big market team. And yes, the reported $85 million 15 year deal, that accomplishes the same thing as the Devils deal, would not have been rejected, because the league would have liked to see a big name player in LA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How mad could you REALLY be if you gambled away 2.5 mill and only had 97.5 mill remaining....

Really F'ing mad. That's a crapload of money, regardless of how much other money I have left. If you have 50k in the bank, it'd be like blowing 1,250 down at AC, but worse, because your absolute dollar amount lost is so much greater.

To relate to situations I'm more familiar with. I've seen people tank a 1 million dollar mortgage over a 100 dollar fee they didn't realize they'd have to pay themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How mad could you REALLY be if you gambled away 2.5 mill and only had 97.5 mill remaining....

quite, actually. if i have $100,000 and gamble away $2500, that's going to be a pretty rotten day. i understand that the magnitude is different, but 2.5 million dollars is still 2.5 million dollars.

It's not animus against the Devils, so much as looking the other way when it comes to teams that are more marketable.

LA is a big market team. And yes, the reported $85 million 15 year deal, that accomplishes the same thing as the Devils deal, would not have been rejected, because the league would have liked to see a big name player in LA.

yeah remember when ziggy palffy was traded to the rangers, except the league nixed the deal?

sometimes your posts come from a different planet, and this one above is one of them. saying such a thing with certainty is patently absurd. again, the league let the devils get away with absolute murder in 2006 and 2007.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really F'ing mad. That's a crapload of money, regardless of how much other money I have left. If you have 50k in the bank, it'd be like blowing 1,250 down at AC, but worse, because your absolute dollar amount lost is so much greater.

To relate to situations I'm more familiar with. I've seen people tank a 1 million dollar mortgage over a 100 dollar fee they didn't realize they'd have to pay themselves.

I think the absolute dollar amount being larger makes it sting less. 97.5 mill is such a large sum of money that 2.5 really does not matter. The 50k/$1,250 example would be more damaging IMO....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I know it's been talked about, but say Bloch does reject the contract under terms that it circumvents the cap. Do the Devils get to exclusiely re-negotiate with Ilya (as if this were pre July 1st), or would the floodgates open for LA to jump right back in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I know it's been talked about, but say Bloch does reject the contract under terms that it circumvents the cap. Do the Devils get to exclusiely re-negotiate with Ilya (as if this were pre July 1st), or would the floodgates open for LA to jump right back in?

If it's voided it's like the contract never happened, Kovy is open market again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a really bad analogy for his point actually, IMO.

In his scenario he is saying all the teams broke the law and the Devils are the ones caught and going to be punished for it because they broke it the worst....but the whole rest of the article suggests he believes since everyone may have been breaking the rules the Devils aren't going to be punished either, which doesn't fit this scenario.

The analogy doesn't have an ending yet since the arbitrator hasn't made his decision yet. The ticket has been written, but now it's being challened in court on the grounds that they were just keeping up with traffic. (It still isn't 100% perfect, but how many analogies are?) We'll hopefully know by Friday whether the judge buys it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0