NHL revises Kovalchuk circumvention penalty. Devils will get 2014 30th overall pick

[Super Nintendo Chalmers]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Seems like there were a lot of contracts that pushed the limits, but wasn't Kovalchuk's most egregious? Had to draw the line somewhere?

The 17-year contract that was first signed by Kovalchuk was the most egregious. That was rejected by the league. It was amended to a 15-year contract which the league accepted. Then the league changed its mind and levied that punishment against NJD. That's bush league.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by nik-

and lol at "The league intends to have no further comment on this matter". Accountability doesn't work like that Gary.

What Millions won't get a chance to get him in front of a mic and ask a question akin to "How fantastic and merciful are you for generously giving a pick to the Devils"?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Super Nintendo Chalmers

The 17-year contract that was first signed by Kovalchuk was the most egregious. That was rejected by the league. It was amended to a 15-year contract which the league accepted. Then the league changed its mind and levied that punishment against NJD. That's bush league.

Except that narrative is untrue... the Devils were fined and were forfeited a pick for attempting to circumvent the cap. That the later negotiated deal passed the league sniff test is irrelevant to being punished for the first.

[puckluck2]

BS but the league's fault for having such idiotic rules. Draft picks should never be a penalty. But why forgive thd fine? They should get the pick but have to pay the fine.

[dino7c]

no wonder they chose not to give up the pick last time...what a joke

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by dammage79

If Kovalchuk didn't bail I'd be a little upset at if they rescinded the penalty. But he bailed, therefore the minimalization of the penalty should respond accordingly.

Why?

Also, the NHL already allowed the Devils a shady escape from Kovalchuk's contract. By rights, he should be considered a suspended player, not "retired".

The NHL is bending over backwards to help a team that cheated, plain and simple. That is not something that should shrugged away. Their cap circumvention with the first Kovalchuk contract was orders of magnitude greater than anyone else's.

[MolsonInBothHands]

So, what is the actual "penalty" the Devils ended up paying?

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

So, what is the actual "penalty" the Devils ended up paying?

1.5 million
A 2011 3rd pick
Dropping roughly 20 picks in the 1st round of the 2014 draft
The inability to use a 2014 1st round pick in a trade

[SeanCharles]

They should have gave them the entire $3 mill back, kept the 3rd and 1st rd picks as penalty.

[Red]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

So, what is the actual "penalty" the Devils ended up paying?

And what rule specifically did the NJD break? From what I remember the rules were quite vague therefore deals like this one, the Kipper/Luongo ones were being signed and approved by the NHL. The intent was clear on all these deals, but some seemed greedier than others.

[Troubamaker]

Can someone explain the difference between Kovalchuk's contract and Luongo's?

[Mister Yamoto]

I'm OK with this. Especially with Kovalchuk leaving.

The problem the league had with these contracts was the "phantom years" put at the end.
As far as I can tell, the only player to retire with phantom years still on his contract is Mikka Kiprusoff. Just sayin.

[Parallex]

Hurmph, I wonder if they're going to allow the devils to get out the Cap Recapture penalty next.

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by Troubamaker

Can someone explain the difference between Kovalchuk's contract and Luongo's?

They both sucked. Devils are getting off easy with the cap recapture because it's so spread out and retired early. Luongo's, due to how front loaded it was may incur greater cap recapture penalties depending on the year he re-tires.

[Troubamaker]

Originally Posted by calumniate

They both sucked. Devils are getting off easy with the cap recapture because it's so spread out and retired early. Luongo's, due to how front loaded it was may incur greater cap recapture penalties depending on the year he re-tires.

So how did the Canucks not get penalized for his contract? was it signed before rules were put in place?

[trackercowe]

Well original Kovalchuk's contract had him signed til he was like 43, right? Luongo's at least ends a few years earlier then that (I think?). So you can make a case that Luongo will indeed play out the remainder of his contract, but how many players play until they're 43? So Kovalchuk's was obviously done up to get around the cap, while Luongo's wasn't necessarily.

Edit: Never mind, both contracts end when they're 43. I guess the only real difference is that the Devils tried to sign Kovalchuk for 17 years, while Luongo's is only 12 years.

Although didn't Kovalchuk's originally have five $1,000,000 dollar years at the end of the deal? There's obvious cap circumvention in the those years. Whereas Luongo's only has two years at that salary.

[Red]

Originally Posted by trackercowe

Well original Kovalchuk's contract had him signed til he was like 43, right? Luongo's at least ends a few years earlier then that (I think?). So you can make a case that Luongo will indeed play out the remainder of his contract, but how many players play until they're 43? So Kovalchuk's was obviously done up to get around the cap, while Luongo's wasn't necessarily.

I think Luongo is signed till 43 as well. NJD were singled out and punished for doing what many other teams had done, Flames included.

[moon]

Seems like Lou knew this going to happen the whole time otherwise he would have given up that pick two years ago.

Not sure why the Devils can't trade the pick that seems like a silly little add on to try and make it seem like a harsher punishment than it is.

Whether you thought the punishment was too harsh at the time or not to change it now is a joke and the optics on the whole thing are terrible.

[Inglewood Jack]

the contracts given out leading up to Luongo's were gradually pushing the cap circumvention a bit further each time. they were stepping over the line slightly more, while trying to remain in the realm of theoretical integrity. Kovalchuk's contract came along and did a triple jump/backflip 720 monster jam over the line. so the spirit of all these contracts was the same, but they just decided to put a stop to it when the most brazen one came to pass.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Troubamaker

Can someone explain the difference between Kovalchuk's contract and Luongo's?

Kovolchuks first contract, the one the devils were penalized for, went until he was 44 and had 6 cheater years on the back end of it. Whereas Luongos went to 42 and has 4 cheater years on the back end of it.

Kippers was the first and there were many after but it wasn't until Kovolchuk that the league stepped in and said that it was cap circumvention. It was just how blatent these contracts were getting. After the Kovolchuk first contract the PA and the NHL agreed that 40 would be the cap on these cheater contracts. Weber and Paraise signed the last of the deals.

A key point is what happened with Kovolchuk's second contract that was accepted and terminated has nothing to do with the issues surrounding the first contract except that the ruling might show a pattern of favour for the league.

The fact that Kovy left or stayed should have no bearing on the punishment. If NJ hadn't signed Kovy to the second deal they still would have been punished for attempting to circumvent the cap.

I do agree that the punishment for the Kovy deal was too harsh given that the NHL continually let each contract get worse without trying to set a standard. I think the 3rd, 20 spots, plus the fine is still quite a harsh penalty for pushing the letter of the law. I look at this as the same as the ROR fiasco that there is no way the NHL would have forced ROR to go through waivers on the flames because it would be too punishing for trying to find loopholes through the CBA.