New Kovy Update ("As the Kovy Turns")

[SS-SS]

That 5mil you speak of =Rolston?

Good one

[maxpower]

they are not punished for losing the case. only the player/agent can be fined for the case. I don't even see how they can be punished by the league because it's a non existant incident. they wrote a bad contract and the player/agent went to the PA and complained. the Devils did none of the kind. it's not circumvention if it didn't happen, and the league would have to have an investigation in order to find out if there was some kind of deal under the table that would lead you to believe actual circumvention.

you guys spazz too easily about this stuff, and if TG says they can be punished in the hearing, he's wrong.

if Bettman pushes too hard, he's done... because it will end up in the real courts and he'd be forced to punish other teams. he needs all the votes he can get. let's not forget, he almost lost his job for the head of Texas Motor Speedway following the lockout. and he knows what about what?!

his position is not as strong as it seems. if they were really interested in dropping the hammer, they should have allowed the contract and then investigated it. really, the way I see it, the only realistic way the team can be punished is if the arbitrator rules FOR the PA, not against it.

[overtime98]

? they have plenty of cap space to sign him, if I recall.

thats right, I think they have about 10 million free.

[MartysGlove]

? they have plenty of cap space to sign him, if I recall.

capgeek has them at 4.4 free, but they still have to sign Staal who's an RFA as well

Burying Redden in the AHL opens up 6.5 though

[maxpower]

capgeek has them at 4.4 free, but they still have to sign Staal who's an RFA as well

Burying Redden in the AHL opens up 6.5 though

good luck with that in this environment. that's not even questionable cap circumvention, that's blatant.

[MartysGlove]

good luck with that in this environment. that's not even questionable cap circumvention, that's blatant.

How?

I think half of the posters here don't realize the difference between circumvention and... following the CBA.

The CBA allows for him to be buried in the minors, how is that circumventing the CBA?

[maxpower]

How?

I think half of the posters here don't realize the difference between circumvention and... following the CBA.

The CBA allows for him to be buried in the minors, how is that circumventing the CBA?

AFAIK, it's never been tested quite like that. someone who is capable of playing in the league, but is paid too much.

Dan McGillis going to the minors doesn't compare

[jkrdevil]

Max is right. So far the only guys who have been buried for multiple years are guys who clearly can't play in the league anymore. If the Rangers try to bury Redden the PA is going to scream bloody murder, especially after this situation. It would probably get to the point where the Rangers would be forced to put him on re-entry waivers.

Edited July 27, 2010 by jkrdevil

[Daniel]

AFAIK, it's never been tested quite like that. someone who is capable of playing in the league, but is paid too much.

Dan McGillis going to the minors doesn't compare

Didn't the Devils do the same thing to Mogilny? Not as politically uncomfortable as it would be to send Redden to the AHL, but I think it's comparable enough.

[Triumph]

rangers would have to do very little to clear the cap space, either waive/trade eminger or deal matt gilroy.

[Amberite]

The Rangers would be playing with fire if they tried to put Redden in the minors. It creates a situation where no player would feel safe with their job, and the NHLPA would definitely object. The Rangers have to find another solution for Redden.

[maxpower]

Didn't the Devils do the same thing to Mogilny? Not as politically uncomfortable as it would be to send Redden to the AHL, but I think it's comparable enough.

Mogilny counted against the cap. they didn't get him off until he "failed a physical" the next training camp. Mogs was basically just fired. it had no effect on the cap.

[jkrdevil]

Didn't the Devils do the same thing to Mogilny? Not as politically uncomfortable as it would be to send Redden to the AHL, but I think it's comparable enough.

They sent Mogilny down the first year after the lockout, but the second year he was technically on LTIR-exemption all year. The situation isn't comparable either. Mogilny couldn't play anymore and was at the end of his career. Same with MicGillis. Those guys basically retired after that. If Redden was a UFA he would still find an NHL job at a decent salary instead of the major one he gets now.

[mmajeski06]

And now we play the waiting game. Thank god I am going on vacation next week...should make the time fly by.

[Neb00rs]

The more I think about this whole situation, the more I am coming to be sure that the Devils are gonna win this case.

This is going to be very simple for an arbitrator who is an experienced lawyer. He's going to read the contract and then read the CBA. He's going to see what is obvious - there is clear intent to circumvent the CBA. But there are some facts that simply trump that intent.

1. He is certainly going to factor in the standard the NHL has set with previous contracts.

2. The arbitrator is not going to be basing his judgment solely on something as intangible as the "spirit of the cap". He's going to take the history of similiar contracts and say to himself, "On what grounds can this contract be invalid?" He'll then have to take the literal sense of the CBA into account along with this "Spirit of the Cap" the NHL speaks of.

3. He'll see in the CBA that there is nothing that says that a 17 year contract is allowed but a 15 year contract is ok. He'll realize that it is completly wrong to reject the contract based on the idea that Kovy's contract breaks the "spirit of the cap" but other simliar contract don't. The contract is just not that much longer and not that much different overall than the others to make the argument. If it was 25 years then you could start the debate that it's just too blatantly a way to make the Cap useless.

4. I think the league knows they're going to lose. They had to reject the contract as a way to save face. You might think they'll lose face by losing to the Devils but they'd look really bad if they just continued to let these contracts get worse and worse without saying a word. This rejection says, "The cap is real".

Edited July 27, 2010 by ben00rs

[DH26]

Mogilny counted against the cap. they didn't get him off until he "failed a physical" the next training camp. Mogs was basically just fired. it had no effect on the cap.

IIRC they sent him down to make room for Elias coming back form hepatitis. IDK maybe I'm just forgetting since it was 4 yrs ago

[grcenter47]

The more I think about this whole situation, the more I am coming to be sure that the Devils are gonna win this case.

This is going to be very simple for an arbitrator who is an experienced lawyer. He's going to read the contract and then read the CBA. He's going to see what is obvious - there is clear intent to circumvent the CBA. But there are some facts that simply trump that intent.

1. He is certainly going to factor in the standard the NHL has set with previous contracts.

2. The arbitrator is not going to be basing his judgment solely on something as intangible as the "spirit of the cap". He's going to take the history of similiar contracts and say to himself, "On what grounds can this contract be invalid?" He'll then have to take the literal sense of the CBA into account along with this "Spirit of the Cap" the NHL speaks of.

3. He'll see in the CBA that there is nothing that says that a 17 year contract is allowed but a 15 year contract is ok. He'll realize that it is completly wrong to reject the contract based on the idea that Kovy's contract breaks the "spirit of the cap" but other simliar contract don't. The contract is just not that much longer and not that much different overall than the others to make the argument. If it was 25 years then you could start the debate that it's just too blatantly a way to make the Cap useless.

4. I think the league knows they're going to lose. They had to reject the contract as a way to save face. You might think they'll lose face by losing to the Devils but they'd look really bad if they just continued to let these contracts get worse and worse without saying a word. This rejection says, "The cap is real".

keep the faith man, he will be a devil

[maxpower]

IIRC they sent him down to make room for Elias coming back form hepatitis. IDK maybe I'm just forgetting since it was 4 yrs ago

yeah, but they didn't get cap relief. they just cleared a roster spot. there were plenty of other stiffs they could have gotten rid of to make room for Patty. they pretty much fired Mogs, IIRC, not 100% because of the way he was playing (although he was basically a highly skilled pylon at that point.), but because of some off the ice stuff too.

[Triumph]

yeah, but they didn't get cap relief. they just cleared a roster spot. there were plenty of other stiffs they could have gotten rid of to make room for Patty. they pretty much fired Mogs, IIRC, not 100% because of the way he was playing (although he was basically a highly skilled pylon at that point.), but because of some off the ice stuff too.

what are you talking about? of course they got cap relief.

[Triumph]

dreger tweeting that the kovalchuk decision could come as early as next week. so maybe the NHL actually will expedite the arbitrator search.

[Daniel]

dreger tweeting that the kovalchuk decision could come as early as next week. so maybe the NHL actually will expedite the arbitrator search.

Saying process of choosing arbitrator began last night.

[Devs1965]

This is going to be a long week!

[newarkdev01]

I must admit curiosity as to how the come to a decision on who the arbitrator should be. I also can't believe you do a CBA and don't have a system or pool in place for this.

[Daniel]

I must admit curiosity as to how the come to a decision on who the arbitrator should be. I also can't believe you do a CBA and don't have a system or pool in place for this.

See earlier posts. Short answer, CBA says that a "systems arbitrator" is named/renewed every year so one is supposed to be in place. For whatever reason there isn't one in place. From reports I've heard is that each side will submit a list of arbitrators, and in all likelihood a third-party will select the arbitrator from the list. Ordinarily a pool of arbitrators would be selected by a third party. Each side will rank the candidates. The arbitrator is chosen based on matching each side's the rankings.

[BlueSkirt]

This is going to be a long week!

Yes, they have to pick an arbitrator first. Then it may take more than 1 day for each side to present it's arguments. Once that is done, then within 48 hours the decision is handed down.