Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Attention NHL & NHLPA

Fans are beginning to get excited about hockey taking center stage in a few weeks.

Think about that and it should be your major concern right about now.

Get the Kovalchuk deal worked out now or move on, at this point in time fans just want closure.

Regarding the other contracts that may be under review, get those out of the way too.  Make a decision and move on.  We don’t need anything like this hanging over our heads.  Fans want to talk about hockey on the ice, not what is going on with all of this contract talk.

added 8:20am, from Damien Cox of The Spin,

Having teams cook up bizarre, front-loaded contracts that whittle down to $50 a season in the 45th year doesn’t help NHL players in general. It may help teams like Chicago win the Stanley Cup, but the vast majority of NHL clubs don’t benefit from these kind of deals that most GMs see as a form of cheating.

Everybody knows how much money is on the table for the players. It’s set out in the collective bargaining agreement. It’s just a question of how its divvied up. The more Ilya Kovalchuk gets, the less somebody else gets, or at least the bigger the escrow cut that comes the way of the average NHL player.

So if the NHL and the NHL Players Association are really using the 48-hour extension in the Kovalchuk decision to hammer out some kind of mid-CBA agreement on how to handle these deals, it’s probably a good thing for everybody. Well, everybody except maybe Kovalchuk. And a few others.

continued

Filed in: NHL Teams, NHL Talk, NHLPA, | KK Hockey | Permalink
 

Comments

Avatar

Cox uses false logic, if the cap hit is lowered for a player then there is more money available under the cap for each player that season. If in turn the player then retires early the remaining cap hit is also removed. So having a big contract with a big cap hit leaves less money on the table for the players on the lower end of the pay scale. By extending the contract more money is actually spent than the actual cap number allowing the remaining players to get paid more. Isn’t that the entire reason that the GMs/owners are agreeing to these long term deals? It is a win for the players and a win for the owner with money to spend.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 09/02/10 at 10:51 AM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

if the cap hit is lowered for a player then there is more money available under the cap for each player that season.

That’s not true though based on the way the CBA is written.

Regardless of everybody in the league’s cap hit, there is a very specific dollar figure at the end of the season that the players are entitled to, between 54 and 57% of league hockey-related revenues.  Creating false cap room doesn’t affect this number at all.  So, when a player gets $4M over his cap hit and the team fills that with other salaries, it lets them spend more without actually spending more.  If the players get paid more than their share of the dollars (which artificially lowering cap hits can cause), they have to pay it back in Escrow, which they’ve done to the tune of more than 11% of their salaries over the last two seasons. This money comes out of every player’s salary.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 09/02/10 at 11:02 AM ET

Avatar

I see your point and it has made me re-think my understadning of the cap. What it has made me realize is that the NHL is then playing with the players money so why would they care if the contract were 100 years? In your scenrio it doesn’t really matter from a financial standpoint what the cap hit is since the player costs are fixed. The GMS are again the ones trying to “circumvent” their own cap. Shouldn’t it be the ownersthen that stop their GMs from making “poor” decisions? Now ff all of the owners get together and tell their GMs to make the same decision it is then collusion.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 09/02/10 at 11:30 AM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

The GMS are again the ones trying to “circumvent” their own cap. Shouldn’t it be the ownersthen that stop their GMs from making “poor” decisions? Now ff all of the owners get together and tell their GMs to make the same decision it is then collusion.

The problem is that it’s only a handful of teams that can circumvent their own cap because they can afford it with these tricky contracts.  It also leads to weaker revenue sharing streams for the lower-earning teams.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 09/02/10 at 12:00 PM ET

Nathan's avatar

Cox also fails to recognize that the issue that the PA has is that the NHL is trying to change the terms of the CBA without collectively bargaining. That’s the real problem. The PA understands how escrow works and how their share of revenues are fixed, and they understand that these contracts can act as a double-edged sword.

Crushing the Kovalchuk contract and investigating these others isn’t necessarily a problem to the PA financially. But it is a problem that the NHL has used it to change the terms of their agreement with the PA without going through a proper collective bargaining process.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 09/02/10 at 12:07 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com

 

image

image