Loophole Lou finds a way...

[hf101]

The NHL reversed the penalty on the Devils for the Kolvalchuk cap circummvention today. Basically using the excuse that the new owners had nothing to do with it.   Cry "poor me" here, Lou knew exactly what he was doing when he signed Kolvalchuk to that enormous contract. 

 

 

 

The NHL has released the following statement…

The Devils recently applied to the League for reconsideration and relief from a portion of the original penalty, citing primarily changes in circumstances which, in the Club’s view, changed the appropriateness of the sanctions initially imposed.

After due and thorough consideration, the League has decided that a modification of the original circumvention penalty associated with the Kovalchuk contract is warranted.

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/06/dealing-with-the-devils-nhl-reverses-kovalchuk-punishment/related/

 

A number of teams have an issue with this, I surely hope one of them is the Flyers.  The NHL didn't change the rule regarding LTIR for players like Pronger whose injuries make it impossible for them to play out their contract.  But surely Lou finds a way.

[Irishjim]

theres the built in loop hole.....circumvent the cap..NHL levies punishment....sell the team to your sister who is remarried...punishment goes away...rinse and repeat

[OccamsRazor]

A number of teams have an issue with this, I surely hope one of them is the Flyers.

 

The effed up part about it is they get to chose when they get punished, players don't get to pick the games they want to be suspended from, so why does a team get to decide what year the forfeit a draft pick???

[B21]

Didn't the Flyers get away with something similar by adding two $525,000 years at the end of Pronger's deal to make the overall cap hit lower?

[radoran]

The NHL is a joke in everything BUT the product on the ice.

[mojo1917]

The "prince of lies" weasels his way out of another jam.

@B21 whatever... I'm sure Paul ******* Holmgren was the first guy in all of hockey general managing to think of such shenanigans. Please.

Paul Holmgren. The same guy that always over pays, that always throws in a draft pick, he's the guy that figured out how to work around that dang ol salary cap.

[radoran]

The "prince of lies" weasels his way out of another jam.

@B21 whatever... I'm sure Paul ****** Holmgren was the first guy in all of hockey general managing to think of such shenanigans. Please.

Paul Holmgren. The same guy that always over pays, that always throws in a draft pick, he's the guy that figured out how to work around that dang ol salary cap.

 

You left out "the guy that still decided to sign a 35+ defenseman and then, after that guy got injured, offered another long term contract to a 35+ defenseman.

 

No, really.

[MadDevil]

Didn't the Flyers get away with something similar by adding two $525,000 years at the end of Pronger's deal to make the overall cap hit lower?

Several teams got away with similarly structured contracts at the time. The initial Kovalchuk contract just pushed it to a point where the league had to put their foot down, and the Devils were made an example of.

I'm surprised the league reduced the penalty, but considering it's Lou, I probably shouldn't be. He's a sneaky old bastard.

Edited March 7, 2014 by MadDevil

[hf101]

@MadDevil

 

Welcome.

 

I think the league reduced the penalty to help keep the Devils competitive in the Metro Division w/r to their financial struggles.

[B21]

The "prince of lies" weasels his way out of another jam.

@B21 whatever... I'm sure Paul ****** Holmgren was the first guy in all of hockey general managing to think of such shenanigans. Please.

Paul Holmgren. The same guy that always over pays, that always throws in a draft pick, he's the guy that figured out how to work around that dang ol salary cap.

 

Not really my angle.

 

The Flyers pulled the same shennanigans with the Pronger contract that the Devils did with the Kovalchuk contract...but only the Devils were punished.

 

7 years/$35,000,000 = $5,000,000 cap hit per year...

5 years/$35,000,000 = $7,000,000 cap hit per year...

 

(Big difference. I rounded off but those numbers are close.)

 

The deal that got the Devils in trouble took Kovalchuck to age 44.  The deal that was approved took him to age 42...same age Pronger would be at the end of his deal.

 

Again - really not much difference but only the Devils were punished.

 

So if a Flyers fan is really being honest with themselves, they shouldn't be up in arms that the Devils' punishment was reduced.  In fact, they should be happy they weren't punished as well.

 

I think it's pretty clear that the Kovalchuk deal was the straw that broke the camel's back for the NHL and they tried to make an example out of the Devils...later realizing that the punishment didn't fit the "crime".

[B21]

Several teams got away with similarly structured contracts at the time. The initial Kovalchuk contract just pushed it to a point where the league had to put their foot down, and the Devils were made an example of.

I'm surprised the league reduced the penalty, but considering it's Lou, I probably shouldn't be. He's a sneaky old bastard.

 

Just said the same thing...but I'm not surprised the penalty was reduced. 

[mojo1917]

@B21

15 years 100 million

7 years 34.5 million

Yep they're identical. The NHL did investigate and did find "issues".

Still the Flyers are being penalized for it, I'm having a hard time seeing your point .

[hf101]

Not really my angle.

 

The Flyers pulled the same shennanigans with the Pronger contract that the Devils did with the Kovalchuk contract...but only the Devils were punished.

 

7 years/$35,000,000 = $5,000,000 cap hit per year...

5 years/$35,000,000 = $7,000,000 cap hit per year...

 

(Big difference. I rounded off but those numbers are close.)

 

The deal that got the Devils in trouble took Kovalchuck to age 44.  The deal that was approved took him to age 42...same age Pronger would be at the end of his deal.

 

Again - really not much difference but only the Devils were punished.

 

So if a Flyers fan is really being honest with themselves, they shouldn't be up in arms that the Devils' punishment was reduced.  In fact, they should be happy they weren't punished as well.

 

I think it's pretty clear that the Kovalchuk deal was the straw that broke the camel's back for the NHL and they tried to make an example out of the Devils...later realizing that the punishment didn't fit the "crime".

 

That isn't the deal the league penalized.  There is a big difference between Pronger's contract and the declined and penalized  Kolvalchuk deal.  Kovalchuks illegal deal was 3 x the money and 2.5 x the length.

 

Prongers $34.55M deal yeah was 7 years  paying all but $1100 or so in the first 5 years.  The Kolvalchuk deal was a 17 year $102M deal paying $98M in the first 11 years.  No exceptions were made for Pronger signing the deal when he was 34.  Or the Fact that he can't possibly play out his contract.  

 

http://capgeek.com/news/ilya-kovalchuk-s-rejected-contract

[B21]

That isn't the deal the league penalized.  There is a big difference between Pronger's contract and the declined and penalized  Kolvalchuk deal.  Kovalchuks illegal deal was 3 x the money and 2.5 x the length.

 

The "big" difference is that the Pronger deal was 2 years shorter than the "penalized" Kovalchuk deal.  The total money is more and the deal longer because Kovalchuk was younger and still in his prime when he signed his deal (27).  Both deals added "bogus" years at the end at solely for the purpose of circumventing the cap. The penalized Devils deal just happened to go 2 years too many in the eyes of the NHL (at the time).

 

The bogus years at the end of the Pronger deal saved the Flyers $2,000,000 of cap space per year.

The bogus years at the end of the Kovalchuk deal saved the Devlis $2,500,000 of cap space per year.

 

So $500,000 and 2 too many "bogus" years got the Devils punished and the Flyers a pass. Seem fair?

 

Prongers $34.55M deal yeah was 7 years  paying all but $1100 or so in the first 5 years.  The Kolvalchuk deal was a 17 year $102M deal paying $98M in the first 11 years.  No exceptions were made for Pronger signing the deal when he was 34.  Or the Fact that he can't possibly play out his contract.

 

So Pronger's deal paid about 97% of his salary before the bogus years hit.  Kovalchuk's deal paid about 97.5% before the bogus years kicked in.

 

I could care less what the total value of each deal was.  What does matter and what mattered to the NHL was how these "bogus" years that neither player would play gave their respective teams less of a hit against the cap.

 

Pronger deal saved $2,000,000 per year...

Kovalchuk saved $2,5000,000 per year...

 

One is worse than the other.  Not so worse that one team was hit with a $3,000,000 fine and loss of a 1st round pick against no punishment at all for the other.

[jammer2]

@hf101  Excellent summary 101, can we go back to loathing Lou now??   No wonder this little weasel refused to pay the first rounder....he just deflected, buried his head in the sand till the last possible moment and WHAM....somehow gets mercy??  How about the new owners bought the team knowing full well what the penalty was....thus "assuming the risk" involved with the punishment. How about the guy who concocted the whole mess still works there and is successfully weaseling out. What is this, like the lifetime achievement award, a free worst cap circumvention EVER just because you are Lou?  You know you have some stroke in this league when.......geez.

 

    I've been looking forward to the Devils paying this for YEARS....I'm pissed!!!

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

The "big" difference is that the Pronger deal was 2 years shorter than the "penalized" Kovalchuk deal.

I don't think you're looking at the right deal. Click on the link that was posted above. Kovy's rejected contract was 17 years.

[jammer2]

@AlaskaFlyerFan  HA HA  17 friggin years for a 27 year old....good God, if they didn't act, you know somebody would have tried a 20 year contract with a 30 year old....LMAO!!!   He has shown every sign he will be like Gordie Howe!

[B21]

I don't think you're looking at the right deal. Click on the link that was posted above. Kovy's rejected contract was 17 years.

 

Sorry.  I meant two years shorter as far as the players' age at the end of the deal.  The rejected Kovalchuk contract took him to age 44. 2 years older than Pronger will be when his contract runs out (42).   The Kovalchuk deal the NHL accepted took him to age 42 as well.

[B21]

@AlaskaFlyerFan  HA HA  17 friggin years for a 27 year old....good God, if they didn't act, you know somebody would have tried a 20 year contract with a 30 year old....LMAO!!!   He has shown every sign he will be like Gordie Howe!

 

17 years for a 27 year old is only 2 years longer than 7 years for a 35 year old.  Just sayin'. 

 

Different lengths. Same tactic. Same intent.  One punished (and reduced).  One not.

[hf101]

@B21

 

Pronger may not have played the last 2 or 3 years.  On the other hand Kolvalchuk's deal was set up to not play the last 6-7 years of his contract.  Pronger's deal was also signed a full year ahead of the Deal that Lou tried to  deliberately sneak by the NHL.  During that year after Pronger's deal there was a lot of talk on the poor reception of these deals and that the NHL wanted to stop the Maddness. But in full knowledge of what he was doing Lou pushes the limit to get the NHL to set some boundaries.  Basically this is payback as the NHL says thank you to Lou.

[KjellShocked]

17 years for a 27 year old is only 2 years longer than 7 years for a 35 year old.  Just sayin'. 

 

Different lengths. Same tactic. Same intent.  One punished (and reduced).  One not.

 

I hate to agree with Pens fan but what you said is spot on.  I didn't have a problem with what the league was trying to accomplish but if the Debbies deserved a fine and forfeiting a 1sr round pick then the Flyers deserved something as well.

[jammer2]

  @B21  I get what you are saying 21, but the Kovy deal just stunk from the get go. At least everyone knew Pronger's knee's would never see the end of the deal, it made it a little more respectable...lol. The Kovy deal was so very fishy. I kinda always figured he would leave when he was fairly young, bolt to the KHL....in fact, I'm betting Kovy and Lou had a back door deal that he could leave after a few years.

 

  So...in summary....

A) Betting on broken down knees = acceptable

B) Bolting for the KHL at a young age, and getting the 17 year discount for the few years he was there....not acceptable.

 

 In other words, our form of cheating has been practiced before, and people are used to it...this new fangled cheating is just wrong.

[B21]

@hf101

 

Pronger may not have played the last 2 or 3 years.  On the other hand Kolvalchuk's deal was set up to not play the last 6-7 years of his contract.  

 

That's not really accurate.  That means you are saying the Pronger deal was not "set up" for him to play once he hit 40 (the last 2-3 years of his deal being the age 40, 41 and 42 seasons).  You are then saying the Kovalchuk deal was not set up for him to play once hit 38 (the last 6-7 years of the rejected deal being his age 38-44 seasons).

 

Based on their styles of play it's a lot more...reasonable?...to assume Kovalchuk could play effectively up to and beyond age 38 versus Pronger doing the same up to and beyond age 40.

 

The chances of Kovalchuk playing any of those bogus years were a lot better than Pronger doing the same.

 

 

Pronger's deal was also signed a full year ahead of the Deal that Lou tried to  deliberately sneak by the NHL.  During that year after Pronger's deal there was a lot of talk on the poor reception of these deals and that the NHL wanted to stop the Maddness. But in full knowledge of what he was doing Lou pushes the limit to get the NHL to set some boundaries.  Basically this is payback as the NHL says thank you to Lou.

 

I point I agreed with when I said this deal was really the straw that broke the camel's back for the NHL.

 

That said, if you are a Flyers fan you really have no basis for screaming about the reduced penalty because your team did the exact same thing and got away with really because they did it "first."

[jammer2]

@B21 

 

 There was STRAIGHT UP NO WAY Pronger was going to make it to 40...and everyone and their Mother's knew it. Besides the fact he played a FULL 15 seasons before getting to Philly, one thing a lot of people overlook was the 146 career playoff games before getting to Philly. That is almost 2 full seasons of playoff wars, hard fought battles every one of them! That *had* to take a HUGE toll on his body. How many knee surgeries, back...arm, shoulder...he was a walking MASH unit for God's sake. By the time he got to Philly, his knee was basically bone on bone.

 

  Sure, they might have hoped for the best, but when he signed, I believed (along with everyone else) that we had a short 2-4 year window to try and win a Cup with him. It almost worked. No way in holy hell would the Flyers have made the finals in 2010 without Pronger, he was a ROCK in those playoffs, even playing hurt, he was amazing!!

[hf101]

That's not really accurate.  That means you are saying the Pronger deal was not "set up" for him to play once he hit 40 (the last 2-3 years of his deal being the age 40, 41 and 42 seasons).  You are then saying the Kovalchuk deal was not set up for him to play once hit 38 (the last 6-7 years of the rejected deal being his age 38-44 seasons).
 
Based on their styles of play it's a lot more...reasonable?...to assume Kovalchuk could play effectively up to and beyond age 38 versus Pronger doing the same up to and beyond age 40.
 
The chances of Kovalchuk playing any of those bogus years were a lot better than Pronger doing the same.

 

However you are only looking at the age factor.  You and I and everyone else knows there is NO WAY Kolvalchuk would play for less than 1M for 6 years in the NHL when the KHL  would be sending him $$$ - love letters.   Pronger on the other hand likely would have probably sat the last year or two in the press box aka (HAL GILL) finishing out his contract.

 

That said, if you are a Flyers fan you really have no basis for screaming about the reduced penalty because your team did the exact same thing and got away with really because they did it "first."

 

 

Generally in most discipline scenarios it is the one who does the offense the second time after being told not to is the one who is punished.  -- As I said earlier Lou knew exactly what he was doing.  He wanted to make the NHL set some rules, what he didn't expect though was the loss of his own draft pick.  One would have thought he would have chosen to forgo the pick the year his team made it to the Stanley cup finals and picked 29th.  BUT NO... he makes that pick as the has organization has plans to cry "poor Me" a couple of years later.