drabley Posted July 19, 2010 Share Posted July 19, 2010 Simon Gagne to Tampa Bay for Matt Walker & 4th round pick.what the fuck I have no clue what Holmgren has been thinking this offseason. It was a "welcome to the club" gift to Stevie Y. Lecavalier, St. Louis, Stamkos, Gagne. Damn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesupervillain Posted July 19, 2010 Share Posted July 19, 2010 So it seems the NHL is more or less the same as it was before the lockout and salary cap, doesn't it? Players are still getting overpaid in relation to what they are actually worth, and players are still regularly signing near or over $100 million dollar contracts, only now because of the cap the managers have to be more creative with how the money is spread over years, so they just add more years at next to no cap hit. How is Kovalchuk's 17 year, $150 million deal somehow better than Yashin's 10 year, $85 million dollar deal that made everyone freak out and made me lose a year of hockey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcm1610 Posted July 20, 2010 Share Posted July 20, 2010 Easy. Kovalchuk has talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forgeagain Posted July 20, 2010 Share Posted July 20, 2010 Hahahaha that Gagne trade is shotgun suicide worthy if you're a Flyers fan. That is so fucking brutal. Matt Walker and a FOURTH? You couldn't get a fucking 2nd rounder out of that? Matt Walker is a 7th D-Man on a decent team. Gagne is a top 6 forward. Totally insane. Kovalchuk's deal is 17 years, $100MM. LA offered 15 years, $80MM. It is COMPLETELY frontloaded so that Kovalchuk will only be making $750,000 or less after the first ten years. It's obviously designed for him to retire or go play in Europe after age 37. Same as Hossa, Franzen, Keith, etc. Yes, it is a way to circumvent the cap, but shit, the CBA was agreed upon by all parties. If a team wants to frontload contracts like that and basically give the player an INCENTIVE to retire at a certain point (once you've made that much money, it's gotta be tough to play hockey at age 38 when you're only getting $1MM or less to do it despite your huge cap hit), then they are completely entitled to do so. That's the way the cap works. I just wish the Blackhawks had been smart enough to do it when they signed Campbell to that 8 year deal. The 15 year deal the Islanders gave DiPietro was completely retarded and not designed for him to retire towards the end - he is going to collect $4.5MM (at a $4.5MM cap hit) every year until 2022 whether he can play or not. Hell, he earned $9MM for playing a total of 13 games the last 2 seasons. Eventually, they are going to have to bite the bullet and buy his ass out one of these days. The good news is that the cap hit on the buyout will only be $1.5MM per year. The bad news is that it's going to be on the books until the 2031-2032 season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcm1610 Posted July 20, 2010 Share Posted July 20, 2010 Haha I forgot Campbell got an 8 yr deal. He certainly isn't that type of player worth buying for almost a decade. Guy can't even play defense. If I was a GM and wanted a 4th forward on the ice, I'd tell the coach to put a 4th forward on the ice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teganandsara Posted July 20, 2010 Share Posted July 20, 2010 With these long contacts trades are going to be harder ad harder to make and we may not see many blockbuster deals anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted July 20, 2010 Share Posted July 20, 2010 With these long contacts trades are going to be harder ad harder to make and we may not see many blockbuster deals anymore. the players getting these 10+ year contracts are generally players that wouldnt be apart of blockbuster trades anymore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted July 20, 2010 Share Posted July 20, 2010 So it seems the NHL is more or less the same as it was before the lockout and salary cap, doesn't it? Players are still getting overpaid in relation to what they are actually worth, and players are still regularly signing near or over $100 million dollar contracts, only now because of the cap the managers have to be more creative with how the money is spread over years, so they just add more years at next to no cap hit.How is Kovalchuk's 17 year, $150 million deal somehow better than Yashin's 10 year, $85 million dollar deal that made everyone freak out and made me lose a year of hockey? because the contracts were the only reason that you lost a year of hockey : Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forgeagain Posted July 20, 2010 Share Posted July 20, 2010 Or it could have had something to do with rapid expansion into non-traditional hockey markets...Nashville, Atlanta, Carolina, etc. Campbell is definitely a valuable player and, at half the price, he'd be worth the money. The problem was that OTHER teams were willing to pay that much or more and the Blackhawks were fucking desperate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcm1610 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 NHL to Kovalchuk, Lou: "Not so fast, guys!" http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=328025 REJECTED! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 NHL to Kovalchuk, Lou: "Not so fast, guys!"http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=328025 REJECTED! HAHAAAAAAAA!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drabley Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 NHL to Kovalchuk, Lou: "Not so fast, guys!"http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=328025 REJECTED! The saga continues. If he wasn't in my sights for Fantasy this year, I'd say fuck him and let him play in Russia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forgeagain Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Lawsuit from NHLPA forthcoming. They will win said lawsuit unless the NHL has some way to PROVE that this deal purposefully circumvents the cap. I mean, we all know it does, but can you prove it definitively? This deal will go through, then aside from any that get signed during the year, there will probably never be another deal like this after the new CBA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teganandsara Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I do not think there will be a lawsuit in the current CBA the NHL is allowed to review contracts for this exact reason. I am just wondering why reject it now and not on other such contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drabley Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I do not think there will be a lawsuit in the current CBA the NHL is allowed to review contracts for this exact reason. I am just wondering why reject it now and not on other such contracts. I'm pretty sure the rest didn't have a forward under contract until he's well into his 40's. Gordie is the only one ever to have such longevity. For a D, (ie: Pronger) that isn't beyond the realm of possibility. Given the front load on this, it's pretty easy to figure out the shenanigans involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaggle Von Swift Posted July 21, 2010 Author Share Posted July 21, 2010 wish the league would reject the Gagne trade on account of Holmgren being a total fucktard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teganandsara Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 wish the league would reject the Gagne trade on account of Holmgren being a total fucktard. That would be the funniest press conference ever Betman's long drawn out explanation on why the trade was rejected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesack18 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 How long until Boogaard's contract is rejected on account of he doesn't play hockey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldsnap Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 i still can't believe we traded halak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forgeagain Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 The NHL has the power to REVIEW contracts - but that doesn't mean they have the power to reject them without justification. Unless they can PROVE that Kovalchuk has no intention to play in 2027, the contract will stand. As obvious as it is that those 6 years on the end are bullshit, there is no way to prove that. Based on the Hossa, Franzen, etc. deals, the CBA allows this contract, period. If they have to, the NHLPA will sue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drabley Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 The NHL has the power to REVIEW contracts - but that doesn't mean they have the power to reject them without justification. Unless they can PROVE that Kovalchuk has no intention to play in 2027, the contract will stand. As obvious as it is that those 6 years on the end are bullshit, there is no way to prove that. Based on the Hossa, Franzen, etc. deals, the CBA allows this contract, period. If they have to, the NHLPA will sue. This is a bit liberal of an interpretation. Assuming that Kovi will play in 2027 would be, frankly, uncharted territory. There is greater evidence to support that he will not be, and the remuneration is geared as such. You said it yourself -- it's obvious bullshit. Sometimes a spade is a spade and no further evidence is required. If the PA doesn't like it, we may as well kiss another season goodbye. I'm all for creative tinkering - say a front loaded 6 year contract for a player in his prime to maintain a franchise caliber player -- but beyond that, it's quite ridiculous. And I think everyone agrees on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 if they want him that bad, just cut those 6 years off the contract and deal with the increased cap hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drabley Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 This offseason has been a fucking turd. Strike that, not even a turd, just a fart. Draft was anti-climactic. Free agency has been shenanigans, stupidity, and LeBron-esque drama. There's nary a good rumor even floating around, damnit! Boooring. Now that the WC is done, I pretty much have no interest in sports of any kind at the moment, and even that was a blip on the radar. Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teganandsara Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 The draft was plenty exciting for me the Oilers got the top draft pick and have made many solid move to improve the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drabley Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 The draft was plenty exciting for me the Oilers got the top draft pick and have made many solid move to improve the team. Not very exciting when the only choice revolved around switching a few vowels around in the name of the top 2 prospects. Taylor, Tyler. Good for The Oil, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.