12374 replies to this topic

[Daniel]

Regardless of what his cap hit is, he'll be making $750k a year. It's not like he'll stick around past when he wants to retire just so he can collect 750k.

stranger things have happened

[njdevil26]

I just talked to someone I know in the Montreal Canadiens organization asking how this rumor got up there... she told me it's pretty much word of mouth around there that the Devils are expected to sign Kovy to this deal any time now.

Sounds to me like it's the rumors we heard earlier this week and the NY Post article making its way up there. I wouldn't put any stock into it.

[Amberite]

Regardless of what his cap hit is, he'll be making $750k a year. It's not like he'll stick around past when he wants to retire just so he can collect 750k.

Just shows you what a different planet these players are living on. I would work till I'm 90 if I was making 750k

[Devils Dose]

It does seem like a rather large loophole...
Hell, why not sign the guy to a 25 year deal, pay him 11m/year for the first 13, then 750k for the last 12? Where's the line?

Why stop there? Why not make it a 80 year, $104million deal, the same as this purported one only with an additional $2mill spread over the last 63 years. (that's a cap hit of $1.3million in case you wanted to know)

I think one way to absolutely end the whole practice would be to make cap hit the larger of the following two things: the actual salary for the player this season; the average salary over the lifetime of the contract. Obviously no GM would ever sign a player to a deal with different salaries in different years ever again, so that squashes the idea altogether.
Unless there's something I'm missing?

[Triumph]

stranger things have happened

this is a ludicrous defense and i despise it. yes, it could happen, but it's extraordinarily unlikely. assuming that we're all still here in 15 years and NHL hockey and the KHL are still in business, $750k would probably be like what $450k is now, and he could easily make more in russia even if he wanted to play professional hockey, which is pretty damn unlikely.

Edited by Triumph, 09 July 2010 - 02:15 PM.

[Devilsfan118]

Why stop there? Why not make it a 80 year, $104million deal, the same as this purported one only with an additional $2mill spread over the last 63 years. (that's a cap hit of $1.3million in case you wanted to know)

I think one way to absolutely end the whole practice would be to make cap hit the larger of the following two things: the actual salary for the player this season; the average salary over the lifetime of the contract. Obviously no GM would ever sign a player to a deal with different salaries in different years ever again, so that squashes the idea altogether.
Unless there's something I'm missing?

Generally speaking, I like how it is setup now. Take clarkson's deal for example; it's appropriate that he make 2m this next year, then 3m in his UFA years. Then again...the GM and player could just react a verbal agreement about it, then receive the average (2.66 in clarkson's case). It's tricky..

I do agree that the extreme examples (Pronger, potentially Kovy) need to be fixed. I don't think the part I bolded is necessarily the best solution though; another idea:

-make it so that the difference between the cap hit and actual salary payed can't differ by a certain percentage during the length of a contract.

Edited by Devsfan118, 09 July 2010 - 02:22 PM.

[Devils Dose]

Just shows you what a different planet these players are living on. I would work till I'm 90 if I was making 750k

Are you willing to put your 90 year-old body on the ice for bodychecks?
I'd imagine you could be suspended without pay if you don't agree to.

[Daniel]

this is a ludicrous defense and i despise it. yes, it could happen, but it's extraordinarily unlikely. assuming that we're all still here in 15 years and NHL hockey and the KHL are still in business, $750k would probably be like what $450k is now, and he could easily make more in russia even if he wanted to play professional hockey, which is pretty damn unlikely.

Or the KHL could be out of business by then, which is is actually not a bad bet.

And players do weird things that f over teams. Exhibit 1, Mats Sundin who wouldn't waive his no-trae clause. Ricky Henderson or Chris Chelios took forever to decide to hang 'em up.

You sign a guy to stick around for 17 years, you have to plan for the contingency that he might want to stick around for all those years.

Edited by Daniel, 09 July 2010 - 02:22 PM.

[Martyisth3b3st]

Or the KHL could be out of business by then, which is is actually not a bad bet.

And players do weird things that f over teams. Exhibit 1, Mats Sundin who wouldn't waive his no-trae clause. Ricky Henderson or Chris Chelios took forever to decide to hang 'em up.

You sign a guy to stick around for 17 years, you have to plan for the contingency that he might want to stick around for all those years.

I just don't buy that Kovalchuk would stick around after he's all thru with playing hockey to make that ridiculously low contract. Like Triumph said... 750k is nothing NOW, imagine what it's going to be in 15 years?

[DevsMan84]

Nine days now and this topic is driving me fvcking crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Triumph]

Or the KHL could be out of business by then, which is is actually not a bad bet.

there will be a russian professional hockey league.

And players do weird things that f over teams. Exhibit 1, Mats Sundin who wouldn't waive his no-trae clause.

so you cite an example of a player who decided to stay with one team for 3 months, which was really not that unusual (the unusual thing is that it was made so public)

Ricky Henderson or Chris Chelios took forever to decide to hang 'em up.

does ilya kovalchuk strike you as one of those people?

You sign a guy to stick around for 17 years, you have to plan for the contingency that he might want to stick around for all those years.

fine, then you give him an NMC for the first 13 years and an NTC for the last 4, problem solved - if he wants that 750k, he can play for it in the minor leagues.

Edited by Triumph, 09 July 2010 - 02:30 PM.

[Devilsfan118]

I just don't buy that Kovalchuk would stick around after he's all thru with playing hockey to make that ridiculously low contract. Like Triumph said... 750k is nothing NOW, imagine what it's going to be in 15 years?

Yeah, but at that point in his life...he'll have all the money he could possibly need. He might just choose to stick around beyond his time because he 'enjoys the game' (See: Pandolfo). Sounds crazy now, especially since some of the posters here peg him as a greedy bastard, but I mean...it could happen

[Daniel]

I just don't buy that Kovalchuk would stick around after he's all thru with playing hockey to make that ridiculously low contract. Like Triumph said... 750k is nothing NOW, imagine what it's going to be in 15 years?

Chris Chelios isn't playing for much more than that. Ricky Henderson the same.

All I'm saying is that whjen you're doling out that much money over a period of many years, you can't just blidling assume that a player will quit or go somewhere else when you want him to.

[justdo3043]

thanks for making room for my cap Martin

[jim777]

100 dollars a year for 2 million years, that should do it. He made 7.5 mil last year, he can afford Stoli for his empty glasses

[DaneykoIsGod]

i believe there is a specific SALARY figure that you cannot exceed per player - i think it's a percentage of the team cap.

too lazy to look it up but that's how they could conceivably stop super long contracts as an attempt for bottomless pit teams (NYR, PHI, DET) to give a guy $15MM in salary but a $7MM cap hit or some such nonsense.

I always thought it was the cap hit, but you're right, it's the salary. No player's salary, in any year of the contract, can make more than 20% of the a team's total cap figure in the year he signed the deal. So, with the cap at $59.4M for the 2010-11 season, Kovalchuk can't make more than $11.88M in any year of any contract signed this year.

Source

[Daniel]

there will be a russian professional hockey league.



so you cite an example of a player who decided to stay with one team for 3 months, which was really not that unusual (the unusual thing is that it was made so public)



does ilya kovalchuk strike you as one of those people?



fine, then you give him an NMC for the first 13 years and an NTC for the last 4, problem solved - if he wants that 750k, he can play for it in the minor leagues.

Yeah, maybe a Russian hockey league with three teams.

Point about Sundin is that he absolutely screwed the Leafs for totally selfish reasons. I can't imagine that he was too stupid to realize that. That it was for only three months is exactly the point. Just as it would have been no skin off Sundin's back to play in another city for another few months when the team he supposedly loved would be better off in the long run. The same way a guy who you've signed to stick around for a long time, might achave his own selfish reasons to want to play through the life of the deal might not take one for the team.

Does Kovy strike me to be like Chelios or Ricky? While I can't speak to Chelios, it's not for nothing that Ricky was for years derided as the greediest player in baseball, just like some folks on certain message boards and in the media seem to describe you know who.

And if he'll agree to have the NMC clause go away toward the end of the deal ahead of time, than that's fine.

[hobgoblin933]

I'm kind of past the point of even caring about the specifics, i just want to know that he signed and then worry about the details.

[Triumph]

Point about Sundin is that he absolutely screwed the Leafs for totally selfish reasons. I can't imagine that he was too stupid to realize that. That it was for only three months is exactly the point. Just as it would have been no skin off Sundin's back to play in another city for another few months when the team he supposedly loved would be better off in the long run. The same way a guy who you've signed to stick around for a long time, might achave his own selfish reasons to want to play through the life of the deal might not take one for the team.

he screwed the leafs for selfish reasons? get out of here. that's ridiculous. he decided he would rather play in toronto. so when a player won't leave town when he's playing poorly, he's selfish, but also when he won't leave town when he's playing well and it's the team that's poor, he's also selfish? toronto is the one who gave him the no-trade clause, and he exercised his right under the CBA. what he ended up doing the next year was rather selfish and silly, but that's not really germane. the maxim 'do everything to help the team' is a difficult one when you're being asked to help the team by leaving it.

Does Kovy strike me to be like Chelios or Ricky? While I can't speak to Chelios, it's not for nothing that Ricky was for years derided as the greediest player in baseball, just like some folks on certain message boards and in the media seem to describe you know who.

there are 12 different players in the last 30 years who've played a season at the age of 41 or older. while, yes, you almost certainly have to be an exceptional hockey player in your prime to be playing at 41 (and kovalchuk fits into this category), i think it is not something worth worrying about when you sign a player to a deal like this.

Edited by Triumph, 09 July 2010 - 02:49 PM.

[SS-SS]

I want a signing noooooooowwwww.