Obviously with what's going on recently a lot of people are debating whether the league should go after the contracts that were given to guys like Pronger, Hossa and Luongo too.
I'm thinking more along the lines of introducing penalties to teams that attempt to circumvent the cap hit. Here's my thought on what would be a fair and balanced penalty system. I'd appreciate any thoughts on it and am curious to see if anyone else can come up with their own set of penalties besides simply voiding the contract.
The league rules a contract attempts to circumvent the cap. Than apply the following rules and penalties.
1) The cap hit remains during the entire intended duration of the contract despite any retirement or defection to another league.
Example: Pronger may not play the last two years. if he retires before the contract is over make it so that the cap hit stays for the last two years. So if he retires with two years left Phil still has the 4.8 mil cap hit. In Kovie's case if he retired with 4 years left on his deal all 4 of those years a 6.8 cap hit would register for a Kovie.
2) A trade within the NHL will result in the new team taking the full cap hit and the old team retaining half the cap hit as a penalty.
Example: Trade Kovie with 4 years left and the Devs still have a 3.4 m cap hit penalty for a guy not on the team. The team that gets him still has the full cap hit.
3) The team can choose to renegotiate the contract and fix it.
Also add that the player CAN refuse an AHL assignment or something so the team has to keep him unless they can trade him.If say kovie is buried as a healthy scratch than obviously the team has a 6.8 m cap hit for a healthy scratch.
You can apply it retroactively to Luongo, Hossa, etc without attacking the cup victory and whatnot.
I bet that Lou did this on purpose for the sake of the League. We had a lock out for a year just so that the owners could have the salary cap and now they are trying to find a way around their own rules. Thats like locking the frig from yourself and leaving the key on the counter. I think its just low. Lou knew the deal would get rejected and he just set a precedent for the entire league and now noone can do these deals. I give mad props to Lou ( as much as I can't stand him or the devils) for trying to save the league from itself.
1. Limit contracts to 5 years
2. Max contract is 10 percent of the cap(I believe it's 20% now, right?)
So the max contract Kovalchuk could get would be a 5 year/5.9 million per year deal. (going with a 59 million cap)
3. If a player is reaching UFA for the first time, on the team he was drafted by, they can offer him 12 percent per year.
So if Kovy was still in ATL they could offer him 5 years/7 million per. This allows teams that draft good players an edge in re-signing them.
Just some thoughts, don't know if it would work or if the players would go for it.
I personally like this, but I would add this:
If a player is reaching UFA for the first time, on the team he was drafted by, they can offer him 12 percent per year. For each additional pending FA status, a 2% increase can be extended.
so based on your example, 12% for the first UFA status, 14% for the next, and so on.
I would add to that though, if a team decides not to sign said player and another team signs said player, the new team can offer -4% to what the player denied.
so, for example, player A gets drafted by the SJ Sharks, signs three extensions, getting him max 16%, and then the Rangers sign him in FA, the max the Rangers can sign him for is 12%
1. Limit contracts to 5 years 2. Max contract is 10 percent of the cap(I believe it's 20% now, right?)
So the max contract Kovalchuk could get would be a 5 year/5.9 million per year deal. (going with a 59 million cap)
3. If a player is reaching UFA for the first time, on the team he was drafted by, they can offer him 12 percent per year.
So if Kovy was still in ATL they could offer him 5 years/7 million per. This allows teams that draft good players an edge in re-signing them.
Just some thoughts, don't know if it would work or if the players would go for it.
Will never, ever happen.
__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB "Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
Sestito still on the make a wish tour. - rholt168
Obviously with what's going on recently a lot of people are debating whether the league should go after the contracts that were given to guys like Pronger, Hossa and Luongo too.
I'm thinking more along the lines of introducing penalties to teams that attempt to circumvent the cap hit. Here's my thought on what would be a fair and balanced penalty system. I'd appreciate any thoughts on it and am curious to see if anyone else can come up with their own set of penalties besides simply voiding the contract.
The league rules a contract attempts to circumvent the cap. Than apply the following rules and penalties.
1) The cap hit remains during the entire intended duration of the contract despite any retirement or defection to another league.
Example: Pronger may not play the last two years. if he retires before the contract is over make it so that the cap hit stays for the last two years. So if he retires with two years left Phil still has the 4.8 mil cap hit. In Kovie's case if he retired with 4 years left on his deal all 4 of those years a 6.8 cap hit would register for a Kovie.
2) A trade within the NHL will result in the new team taking the full cap hit and the old team retaining half the cap hit as a penalty.
Example: Trade Kovie with 4 years left and the Devs still have a 3.4 m cap hit penalty for a guy not on the team. The team that gets him still has the full cap hit.
3) The team can choose to renegotiate the contract and fix it.
Also add that the player CAN refuse an AHL assignment or something so the team has to keep him unless they can trade him.If say kovie is buried as a healthy scratch than obviously the team has a 6.8 m cap hit for a healthy scratch.
You can apply it retroactively to Luongo, Hossa, etc without attacking the cup victory and whatnot.
If only it was that easy.
None of those are satisfactory.
The best solution is simply to regulate how large a % a players salary can drop or rise from year to year of a contract
I bet that Lou did this on purpose for the sake of the League. We had a lock out for a year just so that the owners could have the salary cap and now they are trying to find a way around their own rules. Thats like locking the frig from yourself and leaving the key on the counter. I think its just low. Lou knew the deal would get rejected and he just set a precedent for the entire league and now noone can do these deals. I give mad props to Lou ( as much as I can't stand him or the devils) for trying to save the league from itself.
The Devils owners constructed the contract.... Lamoriello just endorsed signing the player and he said so much himself...
Its a good idea fiscally but the NHL would get plundered by the KHL. We would find out who's in it for the $$$ though
Listen, every shift could be these guys last. Its a dangerous sport and at the NHL level you have guys with families to think of.
You can love hockey all you want, but if you get $6 million to play in Edmonton or New Jersey, or else you can get $12 million to play in Moscow, how do you turn that down? This is particularly true for Russian and European players.
A Finnish player is a short train ride away from St. Petersburg, so why not play for SKA St. Petersburg instead of the Oilers half a world away?
All the top European players will leave for the KHL. Those who are reluctant to leave now when only a few talents are in Russia will leave when there will be a mass exodus.
Many Americans and Canadians will follow them. I've never been there, but I heard that St. Petersburg is beautiful. So why rot in Carolina or Calgary for half the money when you can be in Venice-of-the-North for twice the money?
are you serious ? In 1 year these guys make more than the average worker in 20.
Irrelevant and not necessarily true.
Sure a guy like Kovalchuk is making the QUAN, but the average salary in the NHL is about 1.5 mill gross. Got to pay the agent, the taxes etc
Yes, there are more collegiate players these days, but most of these guys skip higher education. They have to get the $$$ while they can, and whatever they make in their 10yrs in the NHL has to last them a long time.
if a player retires before a contract is done, the team should be charged a cap penalty of the difference between the actual dollars paid to the player over the actual life of the contract and the total cap hit over that period spread over the remaining (unused) years on the deal.
for example, with the nixed Kovalchuk contract, if he were to retire after year 10, NJ would have to carry a cap hit of:
actual payout over 10 years [95,000,000] - cap hit over 10 years [60,000,000] spread over the remainder of the contract [7 years].
so that would be an annual cap hit of $5,000,000 for the Devils, enough to discourage this type of gaming IMO.
You can love hockey all you want, but if you get $6 million to play in Edmonton or New Jersey, or else you can get $12 million to play in Moscow, how do you turn that down? This is particularly true for Russian and European players.
A Finnish player is a short train ride away from St. Petersburg, so why not play for SKA St. Petersburg instead of the Oilers half a world away?
All the top European players will leave for the KHL. Those who are reluctant to leave now when only a few talents are in Russia will leave when there will be a mass exodus.
Many Americans and Canadians will follow them. I've never been there, but I heard that St. Petersburg is beautiful. So why rot in Carolina or Calgary for half the money when you can be in Venice-of-the-North for twice the money?
At the end of the day, hockey players know one thing.... Lord Stanleys Cup is THE TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN
Professional athletes generally WANT to know they beat the best to be the best. They have a fire inside that pushes them to get to the pros and if they're lucky, to a championship.
Money alone is rarely the SOLE motivation for a pro athlete. Hockey players even less so than other sports imo.
There are players right now who could bolt the NHL for a BIG raise in Europe. They stay here because they generally believe, and I agree, the NHL is the ultimate in MAKING IT as a pro player.
The KHL is generally for older players past their prime cashing in, players who couldn't cut it in the NHL and European players who may be talented, but have no wanderlust for North America.
As long as the gap in $$$ isnt too drastic no exodus to Russia is going to happen.
I find it very interesting that Zherdev came back to NA after ONE year in the KHL.
Your argument is off because it assumes certain things.
1. It's an all or nothing game.
It's not. It's a combination of being in the best league vs. money. When the gap is 20-30%, it's one thing. When the gap is 150%, it's another. If Kovalchuk is offered $15m in Moscow vs. $10 in the US, he might stay here. If he is offered $15 vs. $5, the gap becomes too big.
2. All players are the same.
They are not. Some will skip for lesser amounts than others. This is particularly true for European players.
3. The quality gap between the NHL and the KHL will remain.
It won't. As players move to the KHL, it will get better and the NHL worse. You don't notice it right now, but if top players in the game will have to take a 30-50% paycut, there will be a mass exodus of players. First the Russians, then the Europeans, and then even many Americans/Canadians.
As stars leave, all the lesser Russians and Europeans will stay in Europe too. Why move if the KHL is almost as good?
Soon enough, the KHL will reach enough parity with the NHL that going there won't be a downgrade in the quality of competition. The KHL may even become superior in quality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chariot
At the end of the day, hockey players know one thing.... Lord Stanleys Cup is THE TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN
Professional athletes generally WANT to know they beat the best to be the best. They have a fire inside that pushes them to get to the pros and if they're lucky, to a championship.
Money alone is rarely the SOLE motivation for a pro athlete. Hockey players even less so than other sports imo.
There are players right now who could bolt the NHL for a BIG raise in Europe. They stay here because they generally believe, and I agree, the NHL is the ultimate in MAKING IT as a pro player.
The KHL is generally for older players past their prime cashing in, players who couldn't cut it in the NHL and European players who may be talented, but have no wanderlust for North America.
As long as the gap in $$$ isnt too drastic no exodus to Russia is going to happen.
I find it very interesting that Zherdev came back to NA after ONE year in the KHL.
Your argument is off because it assumes certain things.
1. It's an all or nothing game.
It's not. It's a combination of being in the best league vs. money. When the gap is 20-30%, it's one thing. When the gap is 150%, it's another. If Kovalchuk is offered $15m in Moscow vs. $10 in the US, he might stay here. If he is offered $15 vs. $5, the gap becomes too big.
2. All players are the same.
They are not. Some will skip for lesser amounts than others. This is particularly true for European players.
3. The quality gap between the NHL and the KHL will remain.
It won't. As players move to the KHL, it will get better and the NHL worse. You don't notice it right now, but if top players in the game will have to take a 30-50% paycut, there will be a mass exodus of players. First the Russians, then the Europeans, and then even many Americans/Canadians.
As stars leave, all the lesser Russians and Europeans will stay in Europe too. Why move if the KHL is almost as good?
Soon enough, the KHL will reach enough parity with the NHL that going there won't be a downgrade in the quality of competition. The KHL may even become superior in quality.
Lol.... did you really read my post?
Anyway, the KHL will never be on par with the NHL because they don't have the Stanley Cup. Its the GREATEST trophy in all of pro sports and every hockey player believes that to be the truth.
Stop using AVG salary over the life on the contract and use the actual salary + the bonus divided evenly throughout the contract.
This would effectively eliminate these cap circumventention contracts. The only addition would be to limit the actual bonus amount or force the bonus to be paid out evenly over the course of the entire contract.
Seems like it could work out better for all parties.
I bet that Lou did this on purpose for the sake of the League. We had a lock out for a year just so that the owners could have the salary cap and now they are trying to find a way around their own rules. Thats like locking the frig from yourself and leaving the key on the counter. I think its just low. Lou knew the deal would get rejected and he just set a precedent for the entire league and now noone can do these deals. I give mad props to Lou ( as much as I can't stand him or the devils) for trying to save the league from itself.
This has probably more legs than one thinks.
Lou has already made the claim, publically, that he doesn't like thise contracts and thinks they have no place in the game.
He's also stated that this was not his negotiation.
With all that Lou has done for that Franchise, you would think that the owner would listen to the advise of his GM.
However, the best way to rid the game of these is to go along with it knowing it would force the league to look at it.
it's a smart play on Lou's behalf. If it got accepted, that could have been interesting on a whole slew of levels.
The best solution is simply to regulate how large a % a players salary can drop or rise from year to year of a contract
10% increments... 15%.... no more
To me I feel like it's a perfect solution and of course it only goes into affect on the contracts that are ruled to circumvent the cap. Normal contracts of course would not function under this rule. Percentages are good too but with 10+ years to work with it's easy for teams to work around. Maybe tying the lowest possible salary in any given year to highest salary year on the contract. Or have what the salaray is during the year as the cap hit. All good to consider.
To me I feel like it's a perfect solution and of course it only goes into affect on the contracts that are ruled to circumvent the cap. Normal contracts of course would not function under this rule. Percentages are good too but with 10+ years to work with it's easy for teams to work around. Maybe tying the lowest possible salary in any given year to highest salary year on the contract. Or have what the salaray is during the year as the cap hit. All good to consider.
Contracts that circumvent the Cap are not allowed. You cant have two sets of rules.
Anyway, the KHL will never be on par with the NHL because they don't have the Stanley Cup. Its the GREATEST trophy in all of pro sports and every hockey player believes that to be the truth.
//
Did you read mine? Do you not see that I addressed your claim that the NHL will always be significantly better?
And what's your response? That we have a pretty trophy? Seriously? Teenage boys from Russia and Europe will be coming here for a pretty trophy? REALLY?!
Sure a guy like Kovalchuk is making the QUAN, but the average salary in the NHL is about 1.5 mill gross. Got to pay the agent, the taxes etc
Yes, there are more collegiate players these days, but most of these guys skip higher education. They have to get the $$$ while they can, and whatever they make in their 10yrs in the NHL has to last them a long time.
In your original post you said they have to look out for their families , so there is nothing irrelevant about saying they make more in 1yr then the avg.worker in 20. Also, why does it have to last them a long time ? Is it because you play pro sports , you shouldn't have to work for the rest of your life ? BTW , if they invest properly , they won't have to work the rest of their lives.
In your original post you said they have to look out for their families , so there is nothing irrelevant about saying they make more in 1yr then the avg.worker in 20. Also, why does it have to last them a long time ? Is it because you play pro sports , you shouldn't have to work for the rest of your life ? BTW , if they invest properly , they won't have to work the rest of their lives.
Yes, they will have other jobs but many of them will never have the earning potential they enjoyed as Pro.
Most of us GAIN earning potential as we master our crafts, build clientele, finish higher education etc.
