#1Jul 20th, 2010
--
NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
#2
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010
17 years and $102 million US. I can't say I really follow the whole logic train in why the league rejected it but I wonder how it will play out. It does seem, from all the chatter leading up to the signing that Kovalchuk wants to stay in New Jersey, so even if its voided I think they'll find a way to get him there.
#3
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by wulfie68
No no no man. NJ merely set the buying price.17 years and $102 million US. I can't say I really follow the whole logic train in why the league rejected it but I wonder how it will play out. It does seem, from all the chatter leading up to the signing that Kovalchuk wants to stay in New Jersey, so even if its voided I think they'll find a way to get him there.
#4
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010
yes kovalchuk wants to play in new jersey, and he agreed to that contract, but nhl definitely has
rejected it.
they are manipulating the rules, finding loopholes, not really illegal, but making mockery of the
system.
he will never play for 17 more years, and the last 7 years were for 1 mill per year.
it is front end loaded, so he gets his money, and gradually decreases, it makes it possible
for the team to fit under the cap, and spread the money over that amount of time.
he will just walk away from the deal when he retires, at around 35 or so, if his body holds
out that long, as he and the team know he can't possibly play 17 more years.
wonder what they will come up with next.
rejected it.
they are manipulating the rules, finding loopholes, not really illegal, but making mockery of the
system.
he will never play for 17 more years, and the last 7 years were for 1 mill per year.
it is front end loaded, so he gets his money, and gradually decreases, it makes it possible
for the team to fit under the cap, and spread the money over that amount of time.
he will just walk away from the deal when he retires, at around 35 or so, if his body holds
out that long, as he and the team know he can't possibly play 17 more years.
wonder what they will come up with next.
#5
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010
Question...
Is this sort of the NHL's way of avoiding what happened in Major League Baseball with regards to out of control contracts?
Is this sort of the NHL's way of avoiding what happened in Major League Baseball with regards to out of control contracts?
#6
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010
Since they are using a loophole, and it isn't illegal with regards to the CBA of the NHL, I suspect that the Player's Union will grieve this.
Why is the NHL suddenly doing something against this when they allowed the exact same types of contracts to be signed by Hossa, Di Pietro, Pronger, Ovechkin. If they really didn't want this sort of contract to be signed, then they should have stepped in during the very first one.
Why is the NHL suddenly doing something against this when they allowed the exact same types of contracts to be signed by Hossa, Di Pietro, Pronger, Ovechkin. If they really didn't want this sort of contract to be signed, then they should have stepped in during the very first one.
#7
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshiv
yes, we were wondering that same thing, possibly this particular contract goes a step further, notSince they are using a loophole, and it isn't illegal with regards to the CBA of the NHL, I suspect that the Player's Union will grieve this.
Why is the NHL suddenly doing something against this when they allowed the exact same types of contracts to be signed by Hossa, Di Pietro, Pronger, Ovechkin. If they really didn't want this sort of contract to be signed, then they should have stepped in during the very first one.
sure, n. jersey are not going to appeal the decision, and they have five days to come up with a
new contract for kovalchuk.
what i'm not sure about, is kovalchuk now a free agent again, or does he have to wait the five days.
#8
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by talloola
He has to wait the process out. If the NHLPA doesn't grieve it or the arbitrator rules against it, he's a UFA again.yes, we were wondering that same thing, possibly this particular contract goes a step further, not
sure, n. jersey are not going to appeal the decision, and they have five days to come up with a
new contract for kovalchuk.
what i'm not sure about, is kovalchuk now a free agent again, or does he have to wait the five days.
#9
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010
The current CBA explains circumvention as the following in section 26.3:
(a) No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.
I guess they're looking at the difference between the $6million per year at the start and the $550thousand at the end, and judging that this is a blatant attempt to circumvent the rules, that nobody seriously expects him to play for 17 years.
(a) No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.
I guess they're looking at the difference between the $6million per year at the start and the $550thousand at the end, and judging that this is a blatant attempt to circumvent the rules, that nobody seriously expects him to play for 17 years.
#10
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny
that's true, but those same circumstances are present in the other similar contracts that were approved.The current CBA explains circumvention as the following in section 26.3:
(a) No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.
I guess they're looking at the difference between the $6million per year at the start and the $550thousand at the end, and judging that this is a blatant attempt to circumvent the rules, that nobody seriously expects him to play for 17 years.
Quote: Originally Posted by wulfie68
I would presume that n. jersey will come up with an alternative contract offer inside of the 5 days,He has to wait the process out. If the NHLPA doesn't grieve it or the arbitrator rules against it, he's a UFA again.
and it will be interesting to see what the nhlpa do, if anything.
#11
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 21st, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack
Yup.Question...
Is this sort of the NHL's way of avoiding what happened in Major League Baseball with regards to out of control contracts?
#12
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Jul 22nd, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by petros
nhl has a salary cap, so contracts cannot get out of control, this is just a way of manipulatingYup.
the cap that is allready there, but there is a limit and teams cannot go over it.
#13
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Aug 10th, 2010
REPORT: NHL LOOKING INTO LUONGO'S, OTHER FRONT LOADED DEALS
Arbitrator Richard Bloch's ruling to side with the NHL on voiding --'s contract on Monday could affect other such front-ended hockey contracts.
Canucks general manager Mike Gillis confirmed to the Vancouver Sun via email late Monday night that the league is looking into --'s 12-year contract that was signed last fall.
"We have complied with the NHL request for information and are awaiting further instructions," Gillis told The Sun. "Cannot say anything further at this point."
Bloch's ruling specifically mentioned the contracts of Luongo, Philadelphia Flyers defenceman --, Boston Bruins forward -- and Chicago Blackhawks forward -- as deals that the league is still investigating.
"Each of these players will be 40 or over at the end of the contract term and each contract includes dramatic divebacks," Bloch wrote in his ruling. "Pronger's annual salary, for example, drops from $4,000,000 to $525,000 at the point he is earning almost 97% of the total $34,450,000 salary.
"--, with Vancouver, has a 12- year agreement that will end when he is 43. After averaging some $7,000,000 per year for the first nine years of the Agreement, Luongo will receive an average of about 1.2 million during his last 3 years, amounting to some 5.7% of the total compensation during that time period."
The NHL Players' Association argued that those four deals were approved and that Kovalchuk's deal should be approved as well.
Bloch disagreed with that point, writing:
"The apparent purpose of this evidence is to suggest that the League's concern is late blooming and/or inconsistent. Several responses are in order: First, while the contracts have, in fact, been registered, their structure has not escaped League notice: those SPCs [standard player's contracts] are being investigated currently with at least the possibility of a subsequent withdrawal of the registration."
Pronger, Luongo, Hossa and Savard are among a long list of players who have signed long-term deals that included extra years with diminished salary.
Arbitrator Richard Bloch's ruling to side with the NHL on voiding --'s contract on Monday could affect other such front-ended hockey contracts.
Canucks general manager Mike Gillis confirmed to the Vancouver Sun via email late Monday night that the league is looking into --'s 12-year contract that was signed last fall.
"We have complied with the NHL request for information and are awaiting further instructions," Gillis told The Sun. "Cannot say anything further at this point."
Bloch's ruling specifically mentioned the contracts of Luongo, Philadelphia Flyers defenceman --, Boston Bruins forward -- and Chicago Blackhawks forward -- as deals that the league is still investigating.
"Each of these players will be 40 or over at the end of the contract term and each contract includes dramatic divebacks," Bloch wrote in his ruling. "Pronger's annual salary, for example, drops from $4,000,000 to $525,000 at the point he is earning almost 97% of the total $34,450,000 salary.
"--, with Vancouver, has a 12- year agreement that will end when he is 43. After averaging some $7,000,000 per year for the first nine years of the Agreement, Luongo will receive an average of about 1.2 million during his last 3 years, amounting to some 5.7% of the total compensation during that time period."
The NHL Players' Association argued that those four deals were approved and that Kovalchuk's deal should be approved as well.
Bloch disagreed with that point, writing:
"The apparent purpose of this evidence is to suggest that the League's concern is late blooming and/or inconsistent. Several responses are in order: First, while the contracts have, in fact, been registered, their structure has not escaped League notice: those SPCs [standard player's contracts] are being investigated currently with at least the possibility of a subsequent withdrawal of the registration."
Pronger, Luongo, Hossa and Savard are among a long list of players who have signed long-term deals that included extra years with diminished salary.
#14
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Aug 10th, 2010
yes, I would like to see those contracts opened up and redone with some sense of ethics in mind.
although, apparantly nothing illegal was done, a group of lawyers obviously searched and found
a loophole to jump thru, and consequently those other contracts were registered before the kovalchuk
one was applied for, so I'm glad to see those contracts challenged, too bad they weren't turned back
at the time they were sent in to the NHL.
In my opinion it is making mockery of the negotiating system and contract numbers, there is no reason
whatsoever why a player should receive a yearly salary after he has retired and can no longer play
at a level that would make him competetive and desirable to any team.
If, when negotiating they can't fit a complete contract into a normal set of years,
then something has to be changed before it is signed and registered.
At this point kovalchuk is a 'free agent', wouldn't it be interesting if another
team gave him a different offer and he accepted it. hmmmmm
although, apparantly nothing illegal was done, a group of lawyers obviously searched and found
a loophole to jump thru, and consequently those other contracts were registered before the kovalchuk
one was applied for, so I'm glad to see those contracts challenged, too bad they weren't turned back
at the time they were sent in to the NHL.
In my opinion it is making mockery of the negotiating system and contract numbers, there is no reason
whatsoever why a player should receive a yearly salary after he has retired and can no longer play
at a level that would make him competetive and desirable to any team.
If, when negotiating they can't fit a complete contract into a normal set of years,
then something has to be changed before it is signed and registered.
At this point kovalchuk is a 'free agent', wouldn't it be interesting if another
team gave him a different offer and he accepted it. hmmmmm
#15
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Aug 10th, 2010
I have to agree Talloola, but think of the chaos if all the sudden Luongo, Pronger, Savard and Hossa all become UFAs...it could be a lot of fun to watch although maybe not quite so much fun for the teams and fans of the teams they signed with...
#16
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Aug 10th, 2010
Personally I don't think the arbitrator or the league has legal merit to kill these deals based on the current CBA. If the league wasn't smart enough to see this coming then that's their problem until the current agreement ends. Unfortunately, with this BS, I think the league is pushing us towards another season without hockey.
Yippee....
Yippee....
#17
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Aug 10th, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by wulfie68
well in luongo's case many of the fans would be hollering to reduce the money, or even trade him away,I have to agree Talloola, but think of the chaos if all the sudden Luongo, Pronger, Savard and Hossa all become UFAs...it could be a lot of fun to watch although maybe not quite so much fun for the teams and fans of the teams they signed with...
as he didn't play up to the standards expected from him last year, and canuck fans were getting
quite nasty, so it would be interesting, no doubt.
I'm sure if these contracts were opened up, they could be adjusted, with player/agent/team agreeing
to something similar, but more acceptable and ethical, and they could have a clause saying that the
player is still part of that team, but 'please' come up with something we can live with, and for the
time being, the player is not a free agent unless after a certain time period, nothing can be accomplished.
#18
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Sep 3rd, 2010
Now the NHL has given the players association an ultimatum.
They must agree to a new 'adjusted' cap system before the kovalchuk deal is approved, and if
they don't, the kovalchuk deal will be rejected and so will luong's and hossa's will be looked at
again too, and possibly also rejected.
I know the NHL should have rejected the very first deal of this sort, BUT I agree with them, as
the gms' are starting to make a mockery of the cap system, and something has to be done, and just
because it is late in the day, it is still the right thing to do, so 'do it'.
Many canuck fans want to see luongo's contract opened up anyway, so some of it will be taken away,
but we all know that won't happen, but still I don't know how they adjust the contract and still
end up with the same amount of money. For instance, if they have to take the 7. whatever million
cap hit this season, instead of the 5. whatever, which is what the contract says now, the canucks
will be well over the cap, then what.
If the players association completely reject any change in the format they now have, a new nhl
war will start between nhl and players assoc.
They must agree to a new 'adjusted' cap system before the kovalchuk deal is approved, and if
they don't, the kovalchuk deal will be rejected and so will luong's and hossa's will be looked at
again too, and possibly also rejected.
I know the NHL should have rejected the very first deal of this sort, BUT I agree with them, as
the gms' are starting to make a mockery of the cap system, and something has to be done, and just
because it is late in the day, it is still the right thing to do, so 'do it'.
Many canuck fans want to see luongo's contract opened up anyway, so some of it will be taken away,
but we all know that won't happen, but still I don't know how they adjust the contract and still
end up with the same amount of money. For instance, if they have to take the 7. whatever million
cap hit this season, instead of the 5. whatever, which is what the contract says now, the canucks
will be well over the cap, then what.
If the players association completely reject any change in the format they now have, a new nhl
war will start between nhl and players assoc.
#19
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Sep 3rd, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by talloola
You blame the union for this?Now the NHL has given the players association an ultimatum.
They must agree to a new 'adjusted' cap system before the kovalchuk deal is approved, and if
they don't, the kovalchuk deal will be rejected and so will luong's and hossa's will be looked at
again too, and possibly also rejected.
I know the NHL should have rejected the very first deal of this sort, BUT I agree with them, as
the gms' are starting to make a mockery of the cap system, and something has to be done, and just
because it is late in the day, it is still the right thing to do, so 'do it'.
Many canuck fans want to see luongo's contract opened up anyway, so some of it will be taken away,
but we all know that won't happen, but still I don't know how they adjust the contract and still
end up with the same amount of money. For instance, if they have to take the 7. whatever million
cap hit this season, instead of the 5. whatever, which is what the contract says now, the canucks
will be well over the cap, then what.
If the players association completely reject any change in the format they now have, a new nhl
war will start between nhl and players assoc.
This is the fault of a dick who puts the owners interests at the fore front and cares little for the actual game.
Now the little sh*t wants to renegotiate the deal with the PA because he couldn't conclude that this sort of crap would happen after losing an entire year of hockey.
I'd like to know what that lost year actually accomplished.
Prepare for this to happen again in two years.
Time for Gary to go.
#20
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Sep 3rd, 2010
I don't blame anybody, it was just a contract that didn't figure on the gm s finding the big
loophole, which they did, and that does make mockery of the cap system, so it had to change.
And it has changed, as the players union has allready agreed to the change, kovalchuk's contract
with be approved and luongo's will stay as is, as well as Hossa's.
I'm very glad of that, didn't want to see the two sides fighting over this, there are more
important things for them both to get on with, so now they can do that.
loophole, which they did, and that does make mockery of the cap system, so it had to change.
And it has changed, as the players union has allready agreed to the change, kovalchuk's contract
with be approved and luongo's will stay as is, as well as Hossa's.
I'm very glad of that, didn't want to see the two sides fighting over this, there are more
important things for them both to get on with, so now they can do that.
Last edited by talloola; Sep 4th, 2010 at 08:32 PM..
#21
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Sep 4th, 2010
Was being captain part of Luongo's contract? He should not be captain.
#22
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Sep 4th, 2010
I'm not going to blame the union for this mess with the contracts, although their members are complicit in it and part of the problem, but I'm not inclined to blame Bettman either. The culprits are individual agents and GMs trying to get around the cap, some of the most prominent names in this SNAFU being Glen Sather (NY Rangers) and Lou Lamarillo (New Jersey). These are the guys that are playing around with these front end loaded, long term deals.
I think the NHL needs to step in and fix this, and the NHLPA has to be a part of it, or all the good that the lockout (including the pain of that entire lost year) and bringing in the salary cap achieved for the league will be lost.
I think the NHL needs to step in and fix this, and the NHLPA has to be a part of it, or all the good that the lockout (including the pain of that entire lost year) and bringing in the salary cap achieved for the league will be lost.
#23
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Sep 4th, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by #juan
I dunno; I've read that he's the guy that gets the team motivated and working, that is the job of the captain. If he's the guy who does it,he should be captain.Was being captain part of Luongo's contract? He should not be captain.
#24
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Sep 4th, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by #juan
no, being the captain was not part of his contract, but i'm sure gillis allready had it in his mind thatWas being captain part of Luongo's contract? He should not be captain.
he wanted him to.
gillis has asked luongo to take a vew weeks to think of 'how' the captiancy has been for him last
season, and if 'he' thinks it had any negative influences at all, then 'if he wants' he can change
it, we have not yet heard the results.
I think gillis was actually sending a little hint that 'he' also would like to think
about it, and between the two of them, they will probably come to a decision.
I don't think gillis wants to 'just' take it away, he wants it to be a smooth
transition, if there is a transition at all. Confidence is everything for an athlete,
and no one wants to fool with that aspect of any of the players, including luongo.
#25
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Oct 28th, 2010
Just thinking about that kovalchuk situation, things not going good for new jersey to this point.
I think New Jersey organization really dropped the ball here, they spent far too much money on one
player, have left themselves short of players, and if injuries begin to plague their team, they will
be up that 'well known' river without a paddle.
It isn't kovalchuck's fault or problem, although I'm sure he would like to be playing better, and
leading that team right now, BUT, the mistake I think he made along the way was 'NOT' signing with
the los angelos kings, as that team is a much better fit for him, he would have shone with all those
young guys, (as he is still young too), and New Jersey isn't really going anywhere, and I wonder why
he chose to sign there. The money couldn't have been that much different, as when you get that highly
paid, a few million here and there doesn't make the difference, or maybe they wouldn't sign him to a
long term contract, or maybe visa versa, he didn't want the long term contract there.
,
Maybe he thought there was a better chance of going to the stanley cup finals but can't figure that out either, brodeur is
nearing retirement, and they don't have much for defense, so it's a real question mark.
Now all the pressure is on him to be the hero, and I think that team needs far more than him to become
a contender again.
They have always been a defensive team, now they have a very talented offensive player on a team where
the defense isn't very good. Go figure.
I think New Jersey organization really dropped the ball here, they spent far too much money on one
player, have left themselves short of players, and if injuries begin to plague their team, they will
be up that 'well known' river without a paddle.
It isn't kovalchuck's fault or problem, although I'm sure he would like to be playing better, and
leading that team right now, BUT, the mistake I think he made along the way was 'NOT' signing with
the los angelos kings, as that team is a much better fit for him, he would have shone with all those
young guys, (as he is still young too), and New Jersey isn't really going anywhere, and I wonder why
he chose to sign there. The money couldn't have been that much different, as when you get that highly
paid, a few million here and there doesn't make the difference, or maybe they wouldn't sign him to a
long term contract, or maybe visa versa, he didn't want the long term contract there.
,
Maybe he thought there was a better chance of going to the stanley cup finals but can't figure that out either, brodeur is
nearing retirement, and they don't have much for defense, so it's a real question mark.
Now all the pressure is on him to be the hero, and I think that team needs far more than him to become
a contender again.
They have always been a defensive team, now they have a very talented offensive player on a team where
the defense isn't very good. Go figure.
#26
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Oct 28th, 2010
Calgary lost tonight in a high scoring game with colorado, final score colorado 6-calgary 5
Minnesota defeated Washington, 2-1, washington isn't off to a very good start at all,
maybe still sulking from last seasons playoffs, I am not an Ovetchkin follower, he's not
the type of player I like, but I do appreciate his abilities.
Nice to see Boston defeat Toronto 2-0, so much hype because it was the first meeting back in boston
for kessel since the trade, 'big deal'.
Columbus defeated Edmonton 3-2, so much for edmontons good start, kind of fizzled looking now.
Phoenix defeated Detroit 4-2, phoenix has a real nice team this year.
St. Louis defeated Nashville 3-0, ending nashville's great start, they were on top of the league
a couple of days ago.
L.A. defeated Dallas 5-2, L.A. also has a very nice team this season, and when Drew Doughty returns from his
injury (concussion), it will be stronger again, he is a definite keeper.
Minnesota defeated Washington, 2-1, washington isn't off to a very good start at all,
maybe still sulking from last seasons playoffs, I am not an Ovetchkin follower, he's not
the type of player I like, but I do appreciate his abilities.
Nice to see Boston defeat Toronto 2-0, so much hype because it was the first meeting back in boston
for kessel since the trade, 'big deal'.
Columbus defeated Edmonton 3-2, so much for edmontons good start, kind of fizzled looking now.
Phoenix defeated Detroit 4-2, phoenix has a real nice team this year.
St. Louis defeated Nashville 3-0, ending nashville's great start, they were on top of the league
a couple of days ago.
L.A. defeated Dallas 5-2, L.A. also has a very nice team this season, and when Drew Doughty returns from his
injury (concussion), it will be stronger again, he is a definite keeper.
#27
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Oct 28th, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by talloola
NJ probably wishes the league had rejected this deal as well. Maybe they can apply to have it rejected.Just thinking about that kovalchuk situation, things not going good for new jersey to this point.
I think New Jersey organization really dropped the ball here, they spent far too much money on one
player, have left themselves short of players, and if injuries begin to plague their team, they will
be up that 'well known' river without a paddle.
It isn't kovalchuck's fault or problem, although I'm sure he would like to be playing better, and
leading that team right now, BUT, the mistake I think he made along the way was 'NOT' signing with
the los angelos kings, as that team is a much better fit for him, he would have shone with all those
young guys, (as he is still young too), and New Jersey isn't really going anywhere, and I wonder why
he chose to sign there. The money couldn't have been that much different, as when you get that highly
paid, a few million here and there doesn't make the difference, or maybe they wouldn't sign him to a
long term contract, or maybe visa versa, he didn't want the long term contract there.
,
Maybe he thought there was a better chance of going to the stanley cup finals but can't figure that out either, brodeur is
nearing retirement, and they don't have much for defense, so it's a real question mark.
Now all the pressure is on him to be the hero, and I think that team needs far more than him to become
a contender again.
They have always been a defensive team, now they have a very talented offensive player on a team where
the defense isn't very good. Go figure.
#28
Re: NHL rejects Kovalchuk deal
Oct 29th, 2010Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin
yeah, I'll bet they do, they've got themselves in a real mess, very poor manageing indeed. It's such aNJ probably wishes the league had rejected this deal as well. Maybe they can apply to have it rejected.
unusual fit for n.j. to want a player like kovalchuk, he's not their type of player at all, he's a
fantastic talent, just check out his stats over the years, but on 'that' team, no-way.
Similar Threads
7
0
0
8