because there are drops in the pronger, luongo, and savard contracts that are similar, so that cannot be the issue.
Or there's the simplest explanation that Bettman/NHL are completely full of sh*t, and there is absolutely no MEANINGFUL distinction between Kovalchuk's deal, and any of the rest.
And do you honestly believe that the league would have rejected the reported 15 year $80 million deal that the Kings had on the table. (To answer you ahead of time, the extra two years is a meaningless distinction).
I'm sorry, I've never been one to buy into conspiracies, but this absolutely wreaks of vendetta from the league. If this deal is done by any team that the league likes seeing on tv, there would be no issue.
And the NHL wonders why it isn't taken seriously.
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?