HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Kovalchuk to Devils UPD: Arbitrator rules in NHL's favor, Kovy UFA again, Post #701+

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-08-2010, 08:15 PM
  #101
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrok22 View Post
No judge in this county is going to order specific performance in a labor contract.

Great in theory, except for that pesky law called the 13th Amendment!
But he's a russian!

The same laws don't apply, do they?

So, let me get everything straight up to now.

Devils fans think Lou is Jebus and everything is perfect and reasonable as far as this contract with Kovy thingy is concerned.

Everyone else either agrees or thinks its garbage to varying degrees.

We find out the answer tomorrow.

My sarcasm emoticon is broken or needs an upgrade.

Can't we all just get along?
(insert broken sarcasm emoticon here)

etherialone is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:22 PM
  #102
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
 
Jaded-Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,950
vCash: 500

Jaded-Fan is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:23 PM
  #103
Schooner Guy
Registered User
 
Schooner Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMosquito View Post
Honestly even if they approve the Kovalchuk deal(which I feel they will) hopefully the scare tactics by the NHL in actually fighting it keep teams/players from signing anymore of these things before the CBA is up in 2 years.
You just failed Law 101. If the NHLPA wins, a precedent will be set that anyone can sign similar deals.

Schooner Guy is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:27 PM
  #104
azrok22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded-Fan View Post

azrok22 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:35 PM
  #105
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schooner Guy View Post
You just failed Law 101. If the NHLPA wins, a precedent will be set that anyone can sign similar deals.
And then in two years the NHL can modify those deals or change the rules of how their cap hits are calculated under the terms of a new CBA.

kdb209 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:35 PM
  #106
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Can and will sign similar deals. If my agent didn't get me a long term big dollar cap hit friendly deal and I was a name player or even a sort of name player I would fire him and find someone who can get it done.

Drew Doughty will get a 20 year 115mil deal where the least ten years will be at $2.50 cents or will fire his agent and hire Grossman.

I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slew of similar deals and why not? Why wouldn't every player want the same thing?

Of course they would and would likely receive them too (though to varying degrees based on talent etc).

Thinking otherwise is sort of ridiculous imo. Why wouldn't they?

etherialone is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:37 PM
  #107
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrok22 View Post
Shoving the preponderence of the evidence standard in your face? It's the legal burden that will decide the case - and others have been suggesting that the NHL has to meet various ridiculous standards to win, such as "beyond a reasonable doubt" and even "beyond any doubt." I think you're being a bit too sensitive, or are just blinded by your fear that the NHL wins.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue now, but your actual post read:



Thus, your argument was that the NHL had no "actual EVIDENCE". Clearly, you didn't understand the concept of circumstantial evidence, which I pointed out. Quite frankly, your provision of the definition of preponderance of the evidence proved nothing.

Regarding your statement about me believing it would be one sided, I'm not even sure what makes you think I believe it's going to be one sided, considering I've stated directly in my post that you chose to quote that:



Regarding Ronald McDonald, it was a play on McDonald's former slogan "Hey, it could happen."
Way to run up the score dude. Shouldn't a mod call for an automatic forfeit once one poster gets this far ahead of the other one?

I agree with everything you have said. All of the circumstantial evidence is on the NHL's side. From the ridiculous contract itself right to the beginning where Grossman made public his desire to get his client $100M over 10 years. We will see if common sense prevails in this case.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:38 PM
  #108
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Actually, the NHL can't modify the deals (contracts) once they have been signed. They may have an infinite amount of time to raise issue with said contracts but they can't simply throw them out entirely once they have been in play. They can throw them out or refuse them at the start as they have done now with this Kovy thingy but as for the idea that the league can modify an existing contract, I believe they can't.

THey can either accept or refuse them and of course find other issues to challenge them (each contract).

This is why we are going through the mess that we are now. I would imagine that if the NHL tries to make a rule or amend an existing one that would allow them to throw out a contract that has been in play prior to the next CBA that the NHLPA would take issue.

etherialone is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:41 PM
  #109
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
 
Jaded-Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonellisghost View Post
Actually, the NHL can't modify the deals (contracts) once they have been signed. They may have an infinite amount of time to raise issue with said contracts but they can't simply throw them out entirely.

This is why we are going through the mess that we are now. I would imagine that if the NHL tries to make a rule or amend an existing one that would allow them to throw out a contract that has been in play prior to the next CBA that the NHLPA would take issue.
Actually I asked that question in an earlier thread (I believe it was thread number 1,892). Someone pointed out that within the language of the CBA they can in fact throw out these contracts after the fact.

Jaded-Fan is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:44 PM
  #110
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonellisghost View Post
Actually, the NHL can't modify the deals (contracts) once they have been signed. They may have an infinite amount of time to raise issue with said contracts but they can't simply throw them out entirely.

This is why we are going through the mess that we are now. I would imagine that if the NHL tries to make a rule or amend an existing one that would allow them to throw out a contract that has been in play prior to the next CBA that the NHLPA would take issue.
The last CBA changed the terms of every players' contract. They all got 24% pay cuts. The new CBA can easily require a new way of calculating the salary cap that would screw the Devils over big time if the Kovalchuk deal stands.

For example all the new CBA has to say is that the cap hit of any player signed to play beyond the age of 35 is counted against the team's salary cap for the entire duration of the contract whether the player is playing in the NHL or not. That would spell the end of these ridiculous deals.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:45 PM
  #111
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Interesting, I stand corrected if so.

To be certain that I understand this correctly because I have made a mess of what I have read in the current cba if so, the NHL can simply change or make an amendment to an existing contract that it has already approved or can even throw the contract out at anytime during the duration of said contract?

Interesting des ka,

etherialone is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 08:47 PM
  #112
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Thanks K17,

Belay my last (my last last?)

Well then, carry on.

etherialone is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 09:08 PM
  #113
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 53,597
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonellisghost View Post
Actually, the NHL can't modify the deals (contracts) once they have been signed. They may have an infinite amount of time to raise issue with said contracts but they can't simply throw them out entirely once they have been in play. They can throw them out or refuse them at the start as they have done now with this Kovy thingy but as for the idea that the league can modify an existing contract, I believe they can't.

THey can either accept or refuse them and of course find other issues to challenge them (each contract).

This is why we are going through the mess that we are now. I would imagine that if the NHL tries to make a rule or amend an existing one that would allow them to throw out a contract that has been in play prior to the next CBA that the NHLPA would take issue.

modify no

however

they can out their collective heads together as get the math done to correct the cap hit for players who retire before their contract expires

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
Heaven wont take me and hell is afraid I'd take 0ver
jumptheshark is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 09:14 PM
  #114
glenwo2
PATTY'S BETTER!!!
 
glenwo2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Country: United States
Posts: 21,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonellisghost View Post
Just for fun.

How about this compromise.

Kovy HAS to play till he is 44 and HAS to remain a Devil until the end of this contract. If he doesn't fulfill the contract in its entirety then he has to pay a fine equal to what any suspected under payment might be for the last five years of the deal.

The Devils can't trade him and must honor the deal or be fined the same amount in overage equal to the last full payment year of the contract (the last year before the contract drops off to the ridiculously low sum of $500kish).

Kovy retires early he pay back 5 years at rate of the same final realistic contract payment year for each year to buy his way out.

That way the Devils have to honor the entire deal and so does Kovy.

Everyone wins!

I've got a better compromise :


How about you stop making up these "compromises", okay? wow.

glenwo2 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 09:17 PM
  #115
Trends Analyst
Squirrel!
 
Trends Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrok22 View Post
I don't think "young" is going to be a limiting factor - older guys like Chara, Thornton, and Richards could also be potential candidates, imo.
I agree to disagree. We will see I guess.

Trends Analyst is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 09:18 PM
  #116
glenwo2
PATTY'S BETTER!!!
 
glenwo2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Country: United States
Posts: 21,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Way to run up the score dude. Shouldn't a mod call for an automatic forfeit once one poster gets this far ahead of the other one?

I agree with everything you have said. All of the circumstantial evidence is on the NHL's side. From the ridiculous contract itself right to the beginning where Grossman made public his desire to get his client $100M over 10 years. We will see if common sense prevails in this case.
You're still not getting Kovy in the end, regardless. Don't know why you're all "Oh! You just P@WNED him! You Rule!" about this....


And common sense would mean the arbitrator examining the rules of the CBA to see if Lou broke any of them(which he didn't) when he created the contract.



This is an open and shut-the-door-in-your-face case, IMO. Deal is good, Devils get Kovy, rest of the league cries foul. It's how things are meant to be.


Last edited by glenwo2: 08-08-2010 at 09:28 PM.
glenwo2 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 09:30 PM
  #117
None Shall Pass
Cory Stops All
 
None Shall Pass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 5,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
For example all the new CBA has to say is that the cap hit of any player signed to play beyond the age of 35 is counted against the team's salary cap for the entire duration of the contract whether the player is playing in the NHL or not. That would spell the end of these ridiculous deals.
You'd have numerous owners/GMs crying foul if old contracts didn't get grandfathered in. Say what you want about intent but punishing teams who played by the rules in signing these contracts simply isn't fair.
99% chance they get grandfathered. With appropriate raises and demotions for min/max salaries.

None Shall Pass is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 09:32 PM
  #118
MJB Devils23*
No lockout!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 37,006
vCash: 500
The boards might crash tomorrow regardless of the decision.

MJB Devils23* is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 10:10 PM
  #119
Scottkmlps
Moderator
 
Scottkmlps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottyk9 View Post
Hey Kings fans when the NHLPA/Devils/Kovy wins this tomorrow

The league,the devils,kovy owe you nothing.

Not Gary or Lou's fault Dean couldn't close the deal.

Devils offered a max contract to Chara back when he was a FA but he went to Boston. I guess we deserve compensation based of your logic ?
I can do the same thing:

Hey Devils fans when the NHL wins this tomorrow

The league owe you nothing but a BIG fat fine that will count against the cap next season.

Not Gary or Lou`s fault Dean offered a deal that was actually legal.

Blah, blah, blah, ****ing blah....

Scottkmlps is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 10:13 PM
  #120
Scottkmlps
Moderator
 
Scottkmlps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenwo2 View Post
I've got a better compromise :


How about you stop making up these "compromises", okay? wow.
I`ve got a better compromise:

How about you answer the ****ing question?

Scottkmlps is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 10:14 PM
  #121
Sonny21
Registerd User
 
Sonny21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
This should be fun tomorrow...

Sonny21 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 10:16 PM
  #122
njdevsfn95
Help Vas, Sprite.
 
njdevsfn95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 29,509
vCash: 500
What is it with the understanding of the CBA and fines.

The NHL needs to utilize an investigation via Article 26.

Something is up with the website, but go ahead and read the CBA anyhow:

Quote:
Originally Posted by www.inlouwetrust.com
I've also written a second post later that day on why Article 26.13 does not apply to this situation at this juncture. Unless the NHL has conducted an investigation into whether the Kovalchuk contract was circumvention in some form (Article 26.10); the NHL met with all parties involved in a joint discussion for possible circumvention to reconcile the issue (Article 26.12); and attempts at reconciliation failed, the NHL (or the PA) filed for the Systems Arbitrator, and said arbitrator agrees with the NHL's claims within 7 days (Article 26.13(a)), then and only then do the penalties described in 26.13(c) apply. That's a lot to happen completely under the radar, so unless there's some news of some of this or all of this happening, there's no reason at all to worry about Article 26.13. On top of that, Article 26 isn't even called out in Article 11. Do not believe anyone who tells you otherwise.
As he stipulates, the NHL may be keeping things very quiet in terms of an investigation, but there technically isn't a registered contract for them to investigate. I would imagine, that in the situations of Hossa/Luongo where investigations are "ongoing," the same thing would occur the moment this contract is validated. If it is rejected, the NHL made their point to other GMs and possibly the NHLPA that they will have something to say come 2012.


Last edited by njdevsfn95: 08-08-2010 at 10:23 PM.
njdevsfn95 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 10:16 PM
  #123
Scottkmlps
Moderator
 
Scottkmlps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenwo2 View Post
You're still not getting Kovy in the end, regardless. Don't know why you're all "Oh! You just P@WNED him! You Rule!" about this....


And common sense would mean the arbitrator examining the rules of the CBA to see if Lou broke any of them(which he didn't) when he created the contract.



This is an open and shut-the-door-in-your-face case, IMO. Deal is good, Devils get Kovy, rest of the league cries foul. It's how things are meant to be.
Deal is good? Really? So someone like Selanne is getting paid $2 mill a season when he's 38-40 years old, but you expect Kovalchuk to only get $550,000 through those years? Drink that kool-aid much? You're ****ing blind if you don't think this is a cap friendly deal. Oh wait, I'm sorry, you're a Devils fan. My mistake.

Scottkmlps is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 10:27 PM
  #124
glenwo2
PATTY'S BETTER!!!
 
glenwo2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Country: United States
Posts: 21,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottkmlps View Post
I`ve got a better compromise:

How about you answer the ****ing question?

I just did.


Last edited by glenwo2: 08-08-2010 at 10:33 PM.
glenwo2 is offline  
Old
08-08-2010, 10:30 PM
  #125
glenwo2
PATTY'S BETTER!!!
 
glenwo2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Country: United States
Posts: 21,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottkmlps View Post
Deal is good? Really? So someone like Selanne is getting paid $2 mill a season when he's 38-40 years old, but you expect Kovalchuk to only get $550,000 through those years? Drink that kool-aid much? You're ****ing blind if you don't think this is a cap friendly deal. Oh wait, I'm sorry, you're a Devils fan. My mistake.
I don't understand why you're getting all bent out of shape for. Oh wait, I'm sorry, you're a Kings fan. That says it all. My mistake.



(The bitterness is astounding....I've been hearing also that some Kings fans actually demand compensation for their troubles. All because Kovy decided not to go to L.A. )

glenwo2 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:56 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.