Jump to content

New Kovy Update ("As the Kovy Turns")


DevsFan7545

Recommended Posts

Don't see a problem with the league accepting the 15/100. It all depends on how the remaing 5-years or the back end of this deal is structured. At $6.66 is not bad at all.

Bettman should heed this warning

Let him who hath understanding reckon the number of the beast
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 12.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

True but both Hossa and Luongo go to that age. Definitely weakens NHL's argument at any potential arbitration since they already approved deals going to that age. IMO, the bigger issue is how the money is applied to the back end.

bloch's little codicil to his decision basically casts those deals in a poor light and both of them are under investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit skeptical of the 15-100...if that's really the deal then it could have been done six weeks ago without any of this bs hassle. All you would have needed to do was lop off two years of the initial contract. I don't think we really went through six weeks of bs to try to save $666,666 of cap space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree.

not commenting on your post, but your sig:

Loved happy valley when i traveled there with University at Buffalo in 2005, loved it, and your fans were the most classy out there, with the exception of one buck-toothed piece of trailer trash driving a yellow hummer who cursed us out at a gas station as he sped off, right through a red light with a cop right behind him.

back on topic:

JUST SAY YES ALREADY GARY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you don't see the league having a problem with a 15/100, you got some pretty good crack. I'd like some. :lol:

if that is the offer, it's a colossal, colossal disappointment and I'll have plenty to say afterwards.

that would almost certainly, 100% be denied. he will not take a yearly salary low enough to make it work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if they do take 15 years then so much for the reports a few days ago that the NHL didn't want anything longer than 13. And if they don't take 15 then they're shown once again to be hypocrites. I think it's more or less riding on the NTC/NMC and the backloaded money since even Bloch admitted he didn't have a problem with a 15-year deal out of hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TGfireandice

The terms R close, not exact. RT @krwetzel: @TGfireandice so when ths deal holds, cn Kovy get own goal song from the Iron Maiden Collection?

not to toot my own horn here but TG just RT'd me lol

small victory, simple things make me happy, lol

Edited by jagknife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you don't see the league having a problem with a 15/100, you got some pretty good crack. I'd like some. :lol:

if that is the offer, it's a colossal, colossal disappointment and I'll have plenty to say afterwards.

that would almost certainly, 100% be denied. he will not take a yearly salary low enough to make it work.

it'd be interesting if it were a very flat contract. like it went from 8 to 5 or something like that. bloch said himself that a 17 year contract worth 6 million every season would not be a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you don't see the league having a problem with a 15/100, you got some pretty good crack. I'd like some. :lol:

if that is the offer, it's a colossal, colossal disappointment and I'll have plenty to say afterwards.

that would almost certainly, 100% be denied. he will not take a yearly salary low enough to make it work.

The years is not the be-all end-all. The league is worried about Kovalchuk playing out his contract, instead of retiring 5 years early. If the deal is structured in a way that alleviates most of that concern (ie, significant money in the later years), then the league has no reason not to accept it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The years is not the be-all end-all. The league is worried about Kovalchuk playing out his contract, instead of retiring 5 years early. If the deal is structured in a way that alleviates most of that concern (ie, significant money in the later years), then the league has no reason not to accept it.

exactly what they needed to fix. get more money in later years so they cant say "it's a retirement contract" again

BREAKING NEWS

kovalchuk to nj is done. E5

Єklund (2.3% accurate) Twitter

http://goo.gl/yt8i

lmao

if i cared more, i'd make fun of him with a mention, but not worth it.

i'm going to follow you once i post this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit skeptical of the 15-100...if that's really the deal then it could have been done six weeks ago without any of this bs hassle. All you would have needed to do was lop off two years of the initial contract. I don't think we really went through six weeks of bs to try to save $666,666 of cap space.

Lou was probably trying to bring the deal down as slowly as possible to keep the cap hit as manageable as possible. Instead of jumping straight to the 13-year/$91M deal spoken of so much around here, it probably went something like this:

Lou: How about $102M over 17 years.

Daly: We already rejected that.

Lou: OK, how about $101.5M over 17 years.

Daly: Come on, man.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16.5 years.

Daly: You can't have half-years in contracts.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16 years.

Daly: You're breakin' my balls, Lou.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16 years.

Daly: You just said that!

Lou: OK, how about $102M over 17 years.

Daly: You're going in the wrong direction there, chief.

Lou: OK, how about $100.5M over 16 years.

Daly: Only Luongo can play til he's 43.

Lou: OK, How about ... hey, that's B.S.!

Daly: Suck it.

Lou: You suck it.

Daly: Do you wanna sign this Kovalchuk guy or what?

Lou: OK, how about $100M over 15 years.

Daly: I don't hate that.

Lou: Suck it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The years is not the be-all end-all. The league is worried about Kovalchuk playing out his contract, instead of retiring 5 years early. If the deal is structured in a way that alleviates most of that concern (ie, significant money in the later years), then the league has no reason not to accept it.

read the ruling all the way through. they basically had a problem with every feature of the contract.

I don't see how 15/100 (if real) solves any of those. it would smack of a panic attack by the owner/agent and a last ditch, destined to fail, but if you don't try, you fail anyway.

it doesn't mean the deal is 15/100, but if it is... wow. it's not going to work. not with what you already know. it could work (or come close) if he had alot of 7's and 8's in there, but you know that's not going to be the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lou was probably trying to bring the deal down as slowly as possible to keep the cap hit as manageable as possible. Instead of jumping straight to the 13-year/$91M deal spoken of so much around here, it probably went something like this:

Lou: How about $102M over 17 years.

Daly: We already rejected that.

Lou: OK, how about $101.5M over 17 years.

Daly: Come on, man.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16.5 years.

Daly: You can't have half-years in contracts.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16 years.

Daly: You're breakin' my balls, Lou.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16 years.

Daly: You just said that!

Lou: OK, how about $102M over 17 years.

Daly: You're going in the wrong direction there, chief.

Lou: OK, how about $100.5M over 16 years.

Daly: Only Luongo can play til he's 43.

Lou: OK, How about ... hey, that's B.S.!

Daly: Suck it.

Lou: You suck it.

Daly: Do you wanna sign this Kovalchuk guy or what?

Lou: OK, how about $100M over 15 years.

Daly: I don't hate that.

Lou: Suck it.

I should make this the POD...lmfao

Link to comment
Share on other sites

read the ruling all the way through. they basically had a problem with every feature of the contract.

I don't see how 15/100 (if real) solves any of those. it would smack of a panic attack by the owner/agent and a last ditch, destined to fail, but if you don't try, you fail anyway.

it doesn't mean the deal is 15/100, but if it is... wow. it's not going to work. not with what you already know. it could work (or come close) if he had alot of 7's and 8's in there, but you know that's not going to be the case.

It wasn't that they had a problem every feature of the contract, it's that they had a problem with how all the features interacted together. If you take out or reduce 1 or 2 of the features, it read to me, that Bloch would have had a much more difficult time deciding the contract was circumvention in design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lou was probably trying to bring the deal down as slowly as possible to keep the cap hit as manageable as possible. Instead of jumping straight to the 13-year/$91M deal spoken of so much around here, it probably went something like this:

Lou: How about $102M over 17 years.

Daly: We already rejected that.

Lou: OK, how about $101.5M over 17 years.

Daly: Come on, man.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16.5 years.

Daly: You can't have half-years in contracts.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16 years.

Daly: You're breakin' my balls, Lou.

Lou: OK, how about $101M over 16 years.

Daly: You just said that!

Lou: OK, how about $102M over 17 years.

Daly: You're going in the wrong direction there, chief.

Lou: OK, how about $100.5M over 16 years.

Daly: Only Luongo can play til he's 43.

Lou: OK, How about ... hey, that's B.S.!

Daly: Suck it.

Lou: You suck it.

Daly: Do you wanna sign this Kovalchuk guy or what?

Lou: OK, how about $100M over 15 years.

Daly: I don't hate that.

Lou: Suck it.

:clap2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't that they had a problem every feature of the contract, it's that they had a problem with how all the features interacted together. If you take out or reduce 1 or 2 of the features, it read to me, that Bloch would have had a much more difficult time deciding the contract was circumvention in design.

do you think 10/90 that is designed to look like 10/67 is getting through? I don't. that's pretty easy "cap circumvention" to define given their broad new mandate, no?

it has to be something different or, well, yeah... well... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you think 10/90 that is designed to look like 10/67 is getting through? I don't. that's pretty easy "cap circumvention" to define given their broad new mandate, no?

it has to be something different or, well, yeah... well... :lol:

True with the numbers but if there is a NMC throughout the deal it will be tough to clear the space by trading or demoting Kovy. That cures a lot of the circumvention IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.