- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 53,162
- Reaction score
- 226
Before you posted that, I said I misread
I thought you just were talking about the SALARY, not the hit
Devils re-sign Kovalchuk
- Thread starter Oiler35
- Start date
I thought you just were talking about the SALARY, not the hit
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2009
- Messages
- 18,978
- Reaction score
- 645
Meh, I didn't refresh to see if you edited lol... But I'm always right 
Don't ask questions.
Don't ask questions.
sheed
Hi.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2006
- Messages
- 8,061
- Reaction score
- 26
Now, I don't know much about hockey but... 17 years is holy <Censored>. That's ridiculous. The guy will be 45 by contracts end not to mention that is an unheard of length of a contract. Doesn't the NHL have no restrictions on contract length though?
stewza
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2009
- Messages
- 151
- Reaction score
- 1
Can't wait for the new CBA to get rid of the Ken Holland contracts.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 53,162
- Reaction score
- 226
Same. I hate how they can just do them to lower the cap hit while making the player happier
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
- Messages
- 127,713
- Reaction score
- 2,100
this deal is just nuckin' futs.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 14,335
- Reaction score
- 132
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 53,162
- Reaction score
- 226
He still doesn't look right in red IMO
- Thread starter
- #29
Oiler35
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2008
- Messages
- 7,373
- Reaction score
- 258
The NHL has REJECTED this offer.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 29,592
- Reaction score
- 474
Beat me to it Sam. All I can say is LOOOLLLL. He might as well agree to that NYI offer lol.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 24,895
- Reaction score
- 214
were it not for the salary cap, he'd look damn good in black and gold.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 14,335
- Reaction score
- 132
I'd like to know exactly what rules this contract brakes. I mean it's a bullsh.. way to better you're cap situation, obvious, however all I can find about the NHL's justification for rejecting it, "most know he won't play that long". Based on what I've read, the NHL's only grounds for rejecting the deal is b/c they're thinking the same we all are. Either way, that's not breaking any rules.
Players Association will file a grievance and this will end up in an Arbitrator's hands.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 53,162
- Reaction score
- 226
They should just reject every lucrative contract like this
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 21,759
- Reaction score
- 256
Stupid that they rejected this contract.
17 years is crazy though, never seen it before.
17 years is crazy though, never seen it before.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 53,162
- Reaction score
- 226
Its just a loophole around the salary cap, no one plans on keeping him that long
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 53,162
- Reaction score
- 226
So the Devils knew it would be rejected? WTF lol
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 14,335
- Reaction score
- 132
I'm sure they did but they're also aware of the fact that the Player's Union would file a grievance anyways. I tell you what, w/o the NHL producing a rule under the CBA that this contract breaks...an arbitrator is going to rule in favor of the contract. All the NHL is saying is that the contract was structured in a way to curb the cap...okay...we all know that...but that's not illegal.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 53,162
- Reaction score
- 226
I'm hoping this is just another stage of the Kovalchuk soap opera and he goes to LA afterall =)
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2009
- Messages
- 18,978
- Reaction score
- 645
There is absolutely no way that it should be rejected. If there is a flaw in the system, you should allow this contract to be "grandfathered" in, and then change the rule afterward.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 14,335
- Reaction score
- 132
Exactly. The NHL is objecting to a contract without any legal recourse to do so. They'll look even more foolish once an arbitrator forces them to approve thsi deal.