12374 replies to this topic

[Pepperkorn]

Why did Lou tell TG he thought it was a stupid contract? He should throw a jelly jar at himself. I thought he was a moron for saying as much but figured they waited since Saturday so the NHL could approve it. or did Lou WANT this to be rejected?

whatever.

[Devils731]

The control would be not allowing contracts to a player where the player would be asked to play at an age that is *unprecedented* ie. somewhere in the 50s.

The NHL is basically saying it is now illegal for any player to play to age 44.

No they aren't. How many players play until they're 44? Like less than 1%? So we can be 99% sure that a player who accepted a contract that in 17 years he will be that age will likely not be playing that season, especially for what will be below league minimum.

On the flip side, a player who is 42 or 43 has a much better idea if they'll be playing at 44 and will be accepting a contract that will fairly compensate them for their skill at that time.

[Devs3cups]

Those this mean we could lose Kovy, or is it like a little thing, like take off two years or something like that.

What I mean is, is it a big deal?

[Legion15]

love how the league has to 'approve' a private deal between a player and a team. I could see the nhlpa but, bettman's goons... if they're worried about contract length, do they know DP has a 15 year and Ovi has a 13 year? circumvent the cap my @$$, they're just trying to create more drama, or keep us from becoming a household name.

[grcenter47]

so what happens now... is Kovalchuk not a Devil until the NHL approves it

[jim777]

So what now?

[MartysGlove]

"has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency."

The NHL would say this contract has the effect of circumventing the cap, which we all know it does.

This should have been the leagues move on the very first contract like this that came up. They were asleep at the wheel and now the Devils are being the ones punished, but it doesn't mean the league would lose.

Unless Kovalchuk and the Devils come out and say there are no plans for him to play out his contract, that is pure speculation *and inadmissible as evidence in a court trial*

Just because something may seem blatantly obvious, unless there is evidence to back it up, its speculation. See OJ Simpson.

[Triumph]

No they aren't. How many players play until they're 44? Like less than 1%? So we can be 99% sure that a player who accepted a contract that in 17 years he will be that age will likely not be playing that season, especially for what will be below league minimum.

On the flip side, a player who is 42 or 43 has a much better idea if they'll be playing at 44 and will be accepting a contract that will fairly compensate them for their skill at that time.

it's less than .1%. even if we put kovalchuk in the class of players who played at 38, 1% of 38 year olds didn't play at 44.

[SatansDevils]

This is bullsh!t! The NHL wants more money upfront and less years is what they are trying to say! But it was OK for Hossa and Dipietro to have their deals. What bullsh!t and Lou will get this straightened out real fast. Kovalchuk will still be a NJ Devil and he has made his choice. He is not going anywhere else so no need to worry or panic.

Edited by SatansDevils, 20 July 2010 - 09:19 PM.

[Triumph]

Why did Lou tell TG he thought it was a stupid contract? He should throw a jelly jar at himself. I thought he was a moron for saying as much but figured they waited since Saturday so the NHL could approve it. or did Lou WANT this to be rejected?

whatever.

definitely very stupid to do that, have to agree. he was asking for this - whether the league listened or not.

[Devils731]

Unless Kovalchuk and the Devils come out and say there are no plans for him to play out his contract, that is pure speculation *and inadmissible as evidence in a court trial*

Just because something may seem blatantly obvious, unless there is evidence to back it up, its speculation. See OJ Simpson.

This isn't a criminal court case, it would be an arbiter talking to the NHL and the Devils, totally different than a murder trial.

Plus the league is given the authority to be the decision maker in these instances, so if the league believes it to be true they have the power to deny the contract. You need strong proof Kovy will be playing at 44, and there is almost no evidence that will be the case.

[MartysGlove]

No they aren't. How many players play until they're 44? Like less than 1%? So we can be 99% sure that a player who accepted a contract that in 17 years he will be that age will likely not be playing that season, especially for what will be below league minimum.

On the flip side, a player who is 42 or 43 has a much better idea if they'll be playing at 44 and will be accepting a contract that will fairly compensate them for their skill at that time.

Being below league minimum at the time is irrelevant. That's part of the cons of signing a long term deal, you get CURRENT market values, CURRENT min/max'es.

Very simple, if Kovy plays to 44, how exactly is this cap circumvention?
If anything.. it validates the cap.

By rejecting the contract, they are saying they believe (and/or have evidence to back it up in court) that Kovy and the Devils agreed to retire on year 12. Doubt it.

[Elias26]

Well...at least my 500 page plus prediction may come true now...But yea this sucks, I'm not sure I want to go to work tomorrow.

[brickwall30]

once the new CBA is put in place they should really make a clause in it that says no long term contract (anything that is multi-year that is) can not extend beyond age 40, and that all contracts after that age must be 1 year deals. It would sure get annoying for all the old guys in the league and since Chelios is still a higher up in this whole NHLPA thing it is possible they would be against that, but it would serve the purpose of eliminating these contracts from the league.

Until that time, however, I don't see on what grounds this would ever fly unless, as 731 said, the NHL is the one playing judge jury and executioner here (which would be some BS).

[MartysGlove]

This isn't a criminal court case, it would be an arbiter talking to the NHL and the Devils, totally different than a murder trial.

Plus the league is given the authority to be the decision maker in these instances, so if the league believes it to be true they have the power to deny the contract. You need strong proof Kovy will be playing at 44, and there is almost no evidence that will be the case.

Uhh..the league is given authority, but the Devils can challenge the decision in court. The CBA is a legal document.

The league as the *prosecutors* would bear the onus to prove that Kovy will NOT be playing at 44.

The Devils don't need to provide strong proof that Kovy will be playing at age 44, thats like asking a defendant to provide proof of why he's innocent. Courts don't work that way, criminal or civil.

[Amberite]

Lou is not the sort of person to roll over and agree with the rejection. He will take this to court. And I have no idea how the league can effectively argue their case when it follows all CBA rules and there is already plenty of precedent. Courts take past precedence pretty seriously.

[Jerrydevil]

Why did Lou tell TG he thought it was a stupid contract?

You've got a point, but I think Lou might have been emboldened by the fact that there is precedent.

[SatansDevils]

Kovy will still be a New Jersey Devil. The NHL wants more money up front in less years is what they are trying to say IMO. It is strange because the NHL let Hossa do it and Dipietro do it in years past. Its bullsh!t! Lou will get this all worked out with sh!thead Bettman and the NHL tonight or tomorrow. Kovy wants to stay here so no need to worry or panic.

[dejaentendu2101]

All that should happen is it just gets reworked and resubmitted right?

[Devils731]

http://fans.sharks.nhl.com/topic/2850

Someone else looks like they found the answer:

Erat's contract was rejected because it violates what is known as the ''100 per cent rule,'' which effectively states there cannot be a reduction of the total compensation from any given year over a three-year period by more than 100 per cent.

This contract violates it a few times.