mcDevil

No - in effect the deal was a 1-year, 3.6 million dollar contract, with an option to "re-up" if Lou decided not to pull what he pulled, instead of the 1 year, 1.8 million dollar offer that a legit offer would have entailed. Ack - no more time to debate. Gotta go. Have a good weekend!

Here is the problem - the first rounder is not even necessary for the exact same machinations to have been pulled off. It could have just been for the bogus player in russia and the nobody defenseman. This opens the door to teams conspiring to trade even less in return for taking on other teams' cap space and an unwritten promise to do the same in return at some future date. Every team has rights to players they don't think will ever play that they can trade in return for cap space. In effect, this legitimizes pure cap space trading, and opens the door to worse examples. that is why the other GM's are saying "It's going to get ugly". Get ready for a lot of bogus things in the future, and be careful, because I'll be back to identify the hypocrites when it happens.

The fact that he didn't sign his retirement papers is indication that he and Lou could have come to a handshake deal prior to his signing that he not do so, that Bettman should investigate at the very least. This would allow Lou to offer a long-term contract that he could get out of at any time, in order to circumvent the cap. The fact that it is even a possibility is an indication that Bettman needs to pick up the phone and make some determinations. Malakhov himself has said that no parties whatsoever have contacted him for any reason. That is evidence that San Jose's interests are not in obtaining a real asset, but rather obtaining his cap space for sale.

Bettman is capable of voiding anything that is not in the best interests of the game. He is supposed to be deciding what the intentions of deals are, to determine their validity. You said it yourself - "EVERYONE KNOWS MALAKHOV ISN'T GOING TO LACE THEM UP EVER AGAIN" And that's the whole point. Bettman knows it. He's just too much of a weasel to do anything about it. Just like he doesn't have the balls to admit the trapezoid exists because of Brodeur. (though the trapezoid has had very limited effect, IMO) Just admit it - Lou's "luck" or "cleverness" is directly proportional to the weasly-ness of Gary Bettman. It's nothing to be ashamed of. Heck, more GM's should take advantage of that schmuck, until the schmuck has to slink out of town and back to the world of basketball before he finishes turning our sport into basketball on ice.

Not true. They are entirely different..... Korlyuk: PLAYING Malakhov: NOT PLAYING, SAYS HE IS RETIRED, AND STATES THAT HE HAS NO INTENTION OF PLAYING EVER AGAIN. BACKS UP THAT STATEMENT BY NOT RETURNING DESPITE 3.6 MILLION DOLLARS AVAILABLE FOR DOING SO. ALSO STATES THAT HE IS NOT PHYSICALLY ABLE TO PERFORM. THERE IS NO PREDICTING OR MIND-READING - THE WORDS CAME OUT OF HIS OWN MOUTH, AND GUESS WHAT? HE'S NOT ON A PLANE TO SAN JOSE EITHER. In this case "the future" in terms of his cap hit, is only relevant THIS YEAR. Koryluk: Under 35 Malakhov: Over 35 Koryluk: Does not count against anybody's cap. Malakhov: Traded to avoid counting against cap. How should they have done their homework? How about by picking up the phone? Their job is to detemine the validity of trades. They can not do so by just ruling - they have to confirm the facts. Again, if he never signs papers, is he not retired, ever? This is one of the problems with what has been done - A PLAYER CAN SIMPLY AGREE TO NEVER SIGN HIS RETIREMENT PAPERS as a condition of recieving a long-term contract. SO THAT HE CAN PULL THIS NONSENSE AGAIN. The proof will be in the pudding, and that proof will be when this "loophole" is removed from the CBA, to remove any ambiguity in the minds of people who simply want an outcome in favor of their team, at the expense of the league. In the meantime, people can continue to be hypocrites and complain about people like Clarke, for exercising rights under the CBA that clearly were put in to be exercised, instead of some "unwritten rules".

Daly, Bettman, they're all the same beast to me. Bottom line is, neither of them did their homework. Alex Korolyuk does not count against anybody's cap space, as he is not 35 or over. That is the key difference here. I'm going to say "Good luck with the physical there, pal."

Nothing, absolutely NOTHING indicates that he will change his mind. It comes down to the intent of the trade, which is clearly circumvention. Why should he have talked to Malakhov? Because he needs to determine whether or not he is a legitimately tradeable commodity. IT IS HIS JOB. And Koryluk isn't counting against anybody's cap space.

Not only did Roenick play for L.A., but he is STILL playing. Roenick is not even a guy the Flyers wanted to trade, but only did under the extraordinary opportunity to sign the best player in the league. Roenick had just finished #5 in scoring on the Flyers with 47 points in 62 games, including 10 PPG and 12 PPA. He then followed that up with an outstanding playoffs, with 13 points in 18 games, including a series-winning overtime goal, all after playing his way out of a shattered jaw. He was a real asset being sent to the Kings, not a guy his team thought flat out sucked anymore and wanted to get rid of. Malakhov, on the other hand, has stated publicly that he will NEVER play again, and what's more, he has stated that his knees are shot, making it impossible for him to pass a physical even if he changed his mind, and therfore INELIGIBLE TO BE TRADED. He is being traded for a player that is already under contract in another country that has no desire to come over here, and a nobody defenseman. Ergo, one was a real trade, the other a pure salary dump. As for Malakhov "not" being retired - Please. Just because the guy doesn't sign paperwork doesn't mean we all have to close our eyes and make-believe. When he turns 55 will you still say "he could show up and play"? It's the sort of thinking that a REAL commissioner would quickly dismiss. Heck, I bet Gary Bettman didn't even pick up the phone to try to talk to Malakhov or his agent directly. He is a pi$$ poor commissioner.

It is NOT something the new CBA encourages. In fact, there is specific verbiage to DIScourage it. As for the 1st-rounder-for-nothing, there are instances where blatantly 1-sided deals have been voided by the league, as this one should have been. I will have to research to dig up info on them. Either way, Malakhov, as a retired and permanently injured former player, is not a legitimate tradable asset.

Is it or is it not in the best interests of the game to have allowed Lou to do what he did. That is the central question here, not what Sather or Clarke think about it. Not that there's been a quote one way or the other from either of the two. Bringing Clarke and Sather's names into it is a convenient way to fool oneself into thinking this is simply jealousy from close rivals, but there is a bigger picture out there. For one thing, I can think of no reason a 37-year-old player would sign retirement papers now, since it will hurt his former team's chances to trade away his rights.

He got a 1st round pick for nothing. You just stated one of the big reasons this deal should not have been allowed. The Sharks don't have to worry about ever paying the guy a salary, or ever seeing his face. This is the sort of salary dump the CBA was supposed to take care of. In addition, Malakhov says his knees are so shot that he couldn't play if he wanted to. That means he would never pass the physical required to play for San Jose. Whether or not there is verbiage in the CBA to specifically cover this is immaterial, IMO. The important thing is it is exactly the sort of thing that the CBA is supposed to prevent, and is not in the best interests of the game. What this comes down to is not so much that Lou a genius, but rather that Gary Bettman is incredibly weak-willed as a commissioner.