Hockey Articles
The Devils organization, its fans and Ilya Kovalchuk will once again spend a day waiting to hear a definitive decision on whether or not an agreement between team and player will be accepted by the NHL.
While a general uneasiness fills this day, I believe that, by 5 p.m. today, Kovalchuk will officially be a New Jersey Devil for the next 15 years.
Why would I exude such optimism on this contract? The Devils and Kovalchuk both worked with the league during its formation, and the league differs sharply from the one rejected by the NHL and systems arbitrator Richard Bloch earlier this summer. With a better structure in place, the deal should pass the test of the league. After the jump are my reasons for believing the contract will pass.
Reason 1: The “Back End”
If you remember from the first contract, one of the sticking points was the front-loaded nature of the deal. In that 17-year deal, Kovalchuk would have made 97% of his money in the first eleven years of the contract. Those final six years he would have averaged $550,000, which Bloch viewed as a substandard rate. I conceded this point to him while arguing about his rejection of the contract.
But the new 15-year , $100 million contract works out the kinks in the back end. Over the first ten years of the contract, Kovalchuk will make $90 million dollars. In the last five years, Kovalchuk still brings home $10 million. There are a few years of $1 million dollar salary, which can potentially harm the contract. But it should be noted that the Devils will pay Kovalchuk $7 million dollars over the final two years of the deal. Bloch believed that the low level of payment in the first contract created a “retirement” contract, and the Devils would save money. In this deal, when Kovalchuk is over 40, he’ll be bringing home a nice contract. I believe those final two years aren’t there just to appease the league. That $7 million serves as an incentive to play until the end of the contract.
The back-end of this deal far surpasses those of similar long-term contracts. Marian Hossa makes close to $55 million in the first seven years of his 12-year, $63 million dollar contract with the Chicago Blackhawks. In the eighth year, he makes $4 million, a clear transition point from the $7.9 million he made during the first seven seasons. In the last four years of the deal, he makes a combined $4 million.
The same occurs with Roberto Luongo, who makes $57 million in the first eight years of his 12-year, $64 million contract with the Vancouver Canucks. In the ninth year of the deal, Luongo’s salary falls to $3 million, a clear transition from the $6 million he makes from years two through seven. After that, Luongo will make about $4 million in the last three seasons combined.
The back end of Kovalchuk’s deal compares favorably to those two deals above. If anything, it promises to pay out more than those two in the final years of the deal. That in itself makes this deal better structured than others that have passed in the past.
Reason #2 - Age
The Devils rejected 17-year contract brought Kovalchuk to age 44, an almost unheard age for professional hockey player. The new deal, with two years less, brings the contract to 42. While that’s still “old” in sports terms, it makes the potential for Kovalchuk to play more realistic. This is a player who has never sustained a major injury, and generally avoids getting into the dirty areas along the ice where injuries are likely to happen (the corners or the front of the net, for example). It’s not ridiculous to think that Kovalchuk can play until he’s 42 years old.
Once again, let’s pose this against Luongo. As a goalie, Luongo takes a beating from shots, crashing offensive players and his movement throughout the game. You could reason that Luongo would have a shorter shelf-life than Kovalchuk because of the demands of his position. Yet, the league approved his deal, which brings him to the same age. Hossa’s contract also brings him to the same age.
This is an era where we’re seeing older players still lacing up their skates. Mike Modano will play this year at age 40, and we’re seeing guys like Martin Brodeur and Nicklas Lidstrom playing at their highest level as they approach 40. With upgrades in nutrition and fitness, players are enjoying longer careers. The age factor, now at 42, should make the contract more favorable for league approval.
Either way you slice it, this is a more favorable contract than the first. The league has approved several similar deals, and while it’s currently investigating the deals of Luongo and Hossa, among others, it hasn’t rejected them. The Devils are increasing the cap hit per season ($6.66 million per season, which is ironic), meaning they’ll have to cut more salary if the contract is approved. They’ve addressed the issues along the back end and even shaved two years off the contract. If this contract doesn’t pass league review, then I don’t know what contract will.
Ilya Kovalchuk Photo Credits: Al Bello/Getty Images and Ed Mulholland/US Presswire [runningwiththedevils2]
I normally don't write about blogger access for NHL teams. The Atlanta Thrashers have been outstanding with allowing the bloggers access to the team and getting us media credentials for blogger nights at the arena. Their program is a class act, and I would never want to be seen as questioning what they do or whining to get more access.
Recently, though, two articles on Puck Daddy (found here and here) were posted regarding blogger access - most specifically, the limitations that some teams feel need to be placed on it. Some NHL teams are welcoming of the free PR that bloggers bring and others prefer to let the professional journalists in only - each team has their own reasons for it. The teams who do not credential bloggers are taking issue with the fact that bloggers are getting press access in the locker rooms with said team when that team's the visitor. They feel that their rules for press access at their home arenas should be respected by the teams that are hosting them as well. That's understandable. Just as one state has to respect the laws of another, a NHL team needs to respect the requests of the visiting squad - if they aren't as welcoming to bloggers in the locker room then bloggers shouldn't be allowed back there, end of story.
The real issue comes up with whether or not teams need to treat bloggers more like press and less like hacks with computers. Proposals were made, according to Greg Wyshynski, that basically wanted bloggers in a holding pen a la creepy autograph hounds until someone graced the bloggers with their presence. What good that does the bloggers, and by proxy the team, I don't know. The bloggers only get the company line and they have to deal with the indignity of being treated as unprofessional and being treated as such quite obviously. What do you think they'll write about when they get home - what the Oilers' assistant video coach had to say for 5 minutes, or the fact that they got nothing out of the experience and would prefer to not be subjected to it again? It's not good PR to treat bloggers with distain.
(cont. after the jump)
You might wonder why the team would care about bloggers fussing. Bloggers are loud and vocal, and many of them cater to an audience that's substantially sized. Word does get out, and when the bloggers are unhappy, they're more prone to be negative about the team or the team's management and again - that carries.
On the flip side, a blogger that wants to be taken seriously can't rant and rave and be negative with every post just because he wasn't allowed access to the morning skate. If that blogger wants to be taken seriously, he needs to be impartial at the very least. Offer constructive criticism. Be snarky if you'd like to be. But always be professional. I have never witnessed any unprofessional behavior at any bloggers day event I have been to, nor have I really heard of any happening elsewhere. That reputation of professionalism needs be fostered both through actions and through writing.
The memo that was leaked to Puck Daddy was the part of this that I took issue with. Meant to be a suggestion or a rough draft of what a league wide policy could look like, it directly took a shot at unpaid bloggers in it's first stipulation. By saying that bloggers for an on-line news agency/print media should be recognized as a requirement for credentialing basically cuts out every other blogger who is not a journalist. Right off the bat whoever composed this memo makes known that he does not consider bloggers to be appropriate credentialed press. That's fine, but if the memo is about how to handle bloggers, then why come out and imply that you would rather not see them in the arena at all? Also, the employment of full time journalist requirement would also shoot bloggers down, since most blogs I know are run as hobbies and even if they do feature more than one primary writer, they are not staffed by full time professional journalists.
The memo does give the teams final say to who they credential, which is nice, but lays down further stipulations that limit access to the visitors' locker room, limits access to the press box (by either having special seating in the box or by having an area away from the press box), and requires a different style of press pass to signify that the individual is a blogger, and not a paid journalist. I don't disagree with the different press pass (we get a one day media pass that's a different color than the official passes here in Atlanta), and I do agree with the limitations of the access to the visitor locker room. I disagree with the quarantine. If the bloggers are acting professionally in the press box, I'm not sure what the big deal is with them sitting near members of the media. We were all seated a few seats down from Tyler Kennedy at the Penguins/Thrashers game. Not one of us even acknowledged his presence. I didn't even notice until 2/3rds of the way through the 3rd period. No one was unprofessional.
Like I said, I appreciate the access that the Thrashers have been nice enough to give us in allowing us to interview players as well as the coach. I don't expect every team to allow access to every blogger - there needs to be a screening or verification process so people don't start up blogs just to get the access. That's what lessens the experience for the serious bloggers and it's also where the "blogging in pyjamas in your parents' basement" reputation comes from. Some bloggers don't conduct themselves professionally, or write in a polished and appropriate manner.
Of course, some paid full time journalists don't either. You can't use a person's profession or lack thereof to judge if they will conduct themselves in an appropriate manner. The only way that you can judge if a blogger belongs in the press box is trial by fire. Chances are good, though, that the benefits will be encouraging for the team - and the relationship between bloggers and the teams could be, and should be, mutually beneficial.
From Yahoo! Sports:
Of all the ideas being tested this week at the league’s Research, Development and Orientation Camp, the most realistic ones with the biggest potential to impact the game involve overtime. The league is looking at two-on-two and three-on-three concepts, as well as four-on-four with teams switching ends to create long line changes. 
Most everyone agrees the shootout has become too common. The debate is over what to do about it.
One person throwing out his opinion is the always entertaining Jimmy Devellano:
”It was good that they did it. I wanted to see two-on-two. I wanted to see it because I thought, ‘What is this going to look like?’ And then I thought, ‘Oh, it doesn’t really look like hockey.’ ”
That's gold, Jimmy. Thank you for that.
I agree that two-on-two is a little too extreme - and a good way to get out of going into so many shoot-outs would be to have a five minute 4-on-4 period and if you still don't have a winner, make the players switch sides and play a five minute 3-on-3. I'm guessing this would lead to an eventual winner before the extra 10 minutes of playing time is up.
What do you think? Makes the game too long? Is it better than sitting around waiting for that little stripe to be made by the zamboni? Do you even agree that too many games are going to the shootout?
Let me know.
We do not like to bestow this honor on this guy but statistically he is the #1 fantasy defensemen out there. Here is a video.
Not much respect for our #1 guy I understand. However, he does put up points like no one's business and for a defenseman, that means a lot. Now to get to our list. We take just the top 25 so as to add controversy. There will be people left off that maybe should not be. There will also be no protecting of any innocent parties here.
The Program's 2nd annual Top 25 Defenseman List......
1. Mike Green, WSH (Age: 24)
’09-‘10 Stats: 75 GP, 19 G, 57 A, 76 PTS, +39, 54 PIM
Note: Green's goals did drop off BUT he did have 57 assists and 10 PPG's which is something important to keep an eye on. Yes he is a glorified Sandis Ozolinsh but with that Washington offense, he should be the first defenseman taken off any board.
2. Nicklas Lidstrom, DET (Age: 40)
’09-‘10 Stats: 78 GP, 9 G, 40 A, 49 PTS, +22, 24 PIM
Note: You know what you’re getting with Mr. Lidstrom. Even in an off year, he had 49 points last year. Expect 50 or more this year and another potential Norris nod. if this is his last year, he will go out in a blaze of glory especially with an improved team on the man advantage.
3. Duncan Keith, CHI (Age: 27)
’09-‘10 Stats: 82 GP, 14 G, 55 A, 69 PTS, +21, 51 PIM
Note: Keith exceeded all expectations in 09-10, potentially bombing out with 69 points. There are concerns that the 3 PPG's can be cause for alarm but Keith produces assists and a nice plus/minus. That is attractive to fantasy owners. This list like I said will generate controversy as to where we have some ranked.
4. Andrei Markov, MTL (Age: 31)
’09-‘10 Stats: 45 GP, 6 G, 28 A, 34 PTS, +11, 32 PIM
Note: Markov's shot clearly got better until a late season knee injury. The Habs will be better off this year with a healthy Markov from the beginning. If he stays healthy, he could top 60 points and rack up some nice numbers on the man advantage. That is a place fantasy owners always like to go looking for bonus ways to take advantage of the competition.
5. Drew Doughty (Age: 20)
’09-‘10 Stats: 82 GP, 16 G, 43 A, 59 PTS, +20, 54 PIM
Note: I have to be honest and expect Doughty to stay about the same production wise this season. That will disappoint some owners who see him going NUTSO again. I do not but at the same time, his production should make fans content. 35-40 points on the man advantage should do the trick.
6. Dan Boyle, SJS (Age: 33)
’09-‘10 Stats: 76 GP, 15 G, 43 A, 58 PTS, +6, 70 PIM
Note: Boyle is very consistent on a game-to-game basis. 57 points two years ago and 58 last year. That should give you a pretty good idea of what he will do this year. That type of consistency is rare in fantasy leagues for defensemen, especially keepers.
7. Zdeno Chara, BOS (Age: 33)
’09-‘10 Stats: 80 GP, 7 G, 37 A, 44 PTS, +19, 87 PIM
Note: It is understood that he had a down year but his +/- and PIMS are usually very easy to take on most fantasy teams. If you count hits as well in your leagues and blocked shots, that is an added bonus. Expect a bit of an uptick this season...maybe even a career high in points.
8. Chris Pronger, PHI (Age: 35)
’09-‘10 Stats: 82 GP, 10 G, 45 A, 55 PTS, +22, 79 PIM
Note: Pronger is in a nice setup. He can rack up assists and good PIM totals in Philly which makes it a great investment for fantasy owners over at least the next two or three seasons. He may go earlier in drafts just on name recognition alone. Definitely a solid return on investment.
9. Tobias Enstrom , ATL (Age: 25)
’09-‘10 Stats: 82 GP, 6 G, 44 A, 50 PTS, -5, 30 PIM
Note: One of our first real "reaches" in a sense here. Enstrom is on a better team that he was last season honestly. I do like the way Enstrom plays even if his two way game is not all the way there yet. The Thrashers coaching staff has improved and I feel his 50 point season is not a fluke. It may even improve slightly which may mean a few more PPG's. Those are always nice.
10. Tomas Kaberle, TOR (Age: 32)
’09-‘10 Stats: 82 GP, 7 G, 42 A, 49 PTS, -16, 24 PIM
Note: Kaberle seemed almost unhappy last year for the first time in Toronto. It may not have been said publicly but it was there. I just seem to think he gets traded and cranks out a 55 point season somewhere else or gets traded at the deadline and gets hot. Either way, Kaberle will do better this year than last and really he should be on your fantasy radar.
Now for the skinny of 11-25....short, sweet, and to the point!
11. Mark Streit (NYI) -- On a team where scoring is a premium, he may come close to leading the Isles again.
12. Sergei Gonchar (OTT) -- May be a bit old but will still produce some points.
13. Lubomir Visnovsky (ANA) -- Someone in duckland has to get points from the blueline....right????
14. Tyler Myers (BUF) -- Last year was no fluke....expect abot the same fantasy fans.
15. Shea Weber (NSH) -- I like Weber as a player, expect solid contributions from him this year.
16. Erik Johnson (STL) -- I see a nice spike in production this year for the talented d-man.
17. Andy Greene (NJ) -- Do not sleep on Greene, if he gets the minutes, he will get the points.
18. Ian White (CGY) -- Not as good as Phaneuf of old..but good fantasy producer for the Flames.
19. Dion Phaneuf (TOR) -- He cannot be any worse than last year....Really!
20. Filip Kuba (OTT) -- Healthy...he is a much better player. Expect 40 pts..30 on the PP.
21. Pavel Kubina (TBL) -- Could really benefit from playing in Tampa again.
22. JM Liles (COL) -- I still think he gets traded to a better place where he can produce.
23. Paul Martin (PIT) -- Not a big impact but big enough to make the Top 25.
24. Zach Bogosian (ATL) -- He is going to really surprise this year. may even break out!!!!
25. Jason Demers (SJ) -- Another surprise but with Rob Blake gone, Demers could really benefit in the land of Sharks.
Coming next week, we unload with Right Wingers, expect a scream and lots of debate. If you would like give us your Top 25 and we will kindly spotlight on Sunday's episode of The Program. The season is getting closer and so is fantasy hockey season and we will be plenty ready for all of your questions, comments, and more. Bring the heat!!!!
Sincerely,
Chris Wassel
Director Of The Program
The NHL lockout of the 2004-2005 season tarnished the image of the NHL and the lasting effects of the concessions made in the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) are still felt today. One need look no further than your 2010 Stanley Cup Champion Chicago Blackhawks (*swoon* this will never get old). The Chicago Blackhawks have had to say goodbye via one method or another to the following players: Kris Versteeg, Dustin Byfuglien, Andrew Ladd, Adam Burish, John Madden, Brent Sopel, Ben Eager, Nick Boynton, Colin Fraser and finally -- and most notably -- Antti Niemi. That's ten players from the lineup gone, erased, let go from a championship team.
Comparisons were made early and often to the Florida Marlins of 1997. Literally days after their World Series victory, the dismantling began. Their owner, Wayne Huizenga, claimed huge losses despite the team's championship run (gee, sound familiar?) and promptly dumped their stars for young, cheap talent. This particular comparison is completely misplaced due to the fact that Major League Baseball does not have a hard salary cap (teams can go over the salary cap and pay a 'luxury tax') like the NHL does. The Blackhawks were forced into this mass exodus due to the rules the NHL and NHLPA established in the CBA from the summer of 2005.
The salary cap was implemented mainly as a way to give parity to the league, allowing Bettman's beloved southern market teams smaller market teams an opportunity to be competitive with long-standing franchises that were run with effectively little to no limit on their spending to pay players. But has the salary cap actually served this purpose? One could look at the last ten champions and see two two-time champions (Detroit & New Jersey) and take what they would from it. However, I feel a deeper and broader analysis should be made to make this decision, but how does one base the analysis?
To be honest, I wasn't too sure either. So I just acquired the necessary data and started plugging things together to see if I could see any type of pattern. First, some full disclosure: All salary information was acquired from USA Today and comes with some caveats. Firstly, the dollar amounts are salaries, not cap hits. I felt this was alright because it was the ONLY information I could find regarding team salaries dating back to before the lockout. Secondly, the only salaries included are for players who played at least 30 games or would have played 30 or more games if not for injuries. Again, I felt this was not an issue since the players that wouldn't have played 30 games wouldn't have had significant salaries or cap hits. All other historical team information and statistics (records, strength of schedule, simple rating system) came from HockeyReference.com.
Now all that is out of the way, onto the analysis.
The chart above indicates basic team payroll information by season. The top half of the chart is indicating the average percentage change annually by team in both median player salaries (blue line) and total team payroll (orange line). The most obvious thing seen here is the massive dip for the 2005-2006 season indicating the huge drop in spending post-lockout. However, if you throw that season out, each team on average increased spending around 10%, just to ballpark it.
The bottom half of the chart gives us simply the largest total team payroll (red line) and the smallest total team payroll (green line) by season. Looking at the pre-lockout seasons, the difference between the largest and smallest payrolls went from about $44 million to nearly $56 million indicating that the teams that could spend the most money were continuing to spend more while the lower-income teams, while still spending more, could not keep up with the amount of increases the big market teams were making.
Post-lockout those numbers come much closer, with the 2005-2006 season having a difference between the highest and lowest payroll of $26 million. Even just last year the difference was only $32 million. The salary cap appears to have done its job here, keeping teams closer in terms of how much money they can spend. However, it is clear that once the cap circumventing techniques (used for the contracts of Marian Hossa, Chris Pronger, Roberto Luongo, etc.) were put in use, the disparity began to widen again.
The chart above doesn't provide much insight, but I thought it was interesting to look at regardless. It is a team-by-team chart of total team payroll (blue line) and median player salary (orange line) by season. You can change which franchise you're viewing by hitting the page icon (
) at the bottom of the chart. It is just interesting to see the changes in spending policies for each franchise.
Now here's where it gets interesting. The chart above shows the total team payroll against your place in the division. So for example, if you have a high payroll and finish in first, your plot will be in the top-right hand corner, and conversely, if you have a low payroll and finish in fifth, you will be in the bottom-left. Higher your payroll moves your plot up, better finish in your division moves your plot right. Make sense? I hope so.
To make the view more manageable, you can click on the season you want to view and it will highlight it and gray the others out. I'd recommend just going season by season to see how the plots change. What Gary Bettman would want to see is a nearly horizontal line which would indicate that on average, the payroll of each team does not have an effect on what place they finish in. However, most of us would think that you would get a line mostly going bottom-left to upper-right indicating spending more money would typically get you a better hockey team resulting in a higher finish in your division. That's mostly what you get, especially evident in the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 seasons.
However, if you take a look at the post-lockout seasons, you see plots much closer to a horizontal line, indicating that the amount of money a team is spending isn't guaranteeing a strong divisional finish. We've gone from a difference between fifth and first place of almost as high as $26 million down to around $13 million. Once again, it appears that the salary cap has done its job here. However, if you look closely at the last two seasons, you can see that gap beginning to grow slowly as more teams began to take advantage of using long term deals to create more friendly cap hits while actually spending more cash that the salary cap allowed (thus the team salaries at or over $60 million).
This chart is a scatter plot of team payroll (higher payroll plots further to the right) against standings points earned (in blue) and strength of schedule adjusted standings points (in orange) each including a trend line. This series of charts is paginated by season. You can change the season you're looking at by clicking the little page icon () at the bottom of the chart.
Now, again, as with the payroll vs. divisional standing chart above, the league would like to see a near-horizontal trend line, again indicating that payroll has little to no effect on a team's success. However, unlike the showing of the divisional placing against team payroll, this chart shows that leading up to the lockout, the nearly horizontal line was exactly what the league was getting. For example, in the year prior to the lockout, you get the two highest spending teams (Detroit & the Rangers) spending almost the same amount of money, but finishing forty points apart (DET: 109, NYR: 69).
Post lockout we see similar results to previous data though. Once the initial season post lockout passed, you see the trend lines begin to approach a more horizontal state until the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 seasons where the trends start to move to a 45 degree angle as teams began circumventing the salary cap. So, again, we see that the salary cap did its job until franchises wised up to the loopholes in the current CBA and exploited them.
Our last chart shows a scatter plot of team payroll against Hockey Reference's simple rating system (SRS) including trend lines. The simple rating system is just that, a simple rating of each team taking into account goals scored and goals allowed. Just like the previous chart, this is a series of charts paginated by season. You can change seasons by clicking the page icon () at the bottom of the chart.
The trend lines mirror the previous scatter plot where as we approach the lockout, the trend lines become more and more horizontal. Post lockout, the trends again mirror the previous plots, becoming more horizontal, yet becoming more vertical after cap circumvention becomes more effectively used.
Conclusion
So, did the salary cap give us parity? Yes and no. The salary cap certainly aided in curbing spending, thus making a more level playing field for the smaller market teams to compete with the alpha dogs of the NHL. However, the current version of the CBA allowed for a loophole to be exploited by the teams with larger budgets, allowing them to spend beyond the salary cap while small market teams have to increase their budgets beyond capacity just to meet the salary floor.
The salary cap cannot help the smaller market teams that still cannot spend much more than the league's salary floor. Low attendance, low merchandise sales and an unwillingness of free agents to stay in small markets (*COUGH* KOVALCHUK IN ATLANTA *COUGHCOUGH*) have kept the low income teams from utilizing the advantages that the salary cap provides them.
So what does it mean? It means the NHL is going to drag us through hell attempting to get the cap circumvention methods that have become popular the last two years explicitly disallowed in the next CBA. Does it mean a lockout? Depends on how hard the NHLPA wants to fight it. With the rumors swirling around that Donald Fehr (he of the 1994-1995 Major League Baseball strike) is set to become the head of the player's union, we, as fans, could be in for a very bumpy ride come 2012 when the current CBA expires and needs to be renegotiated.
I can certainly see a lockout coming from this, but I'm hopeful that Bettman realizes the amount of growth that the NHL has experienced since the last lockout and how much a second lockout in less than ten years would absolutely murder the fan base.
I guess we can only hope that Bettman will close these loopholes because he subscribes to the same centuries-old proverbs that George Bush does:
"There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - [pauses] - shame on you. Fool me - [pauses] - You can't get fooled again."
...or can you?
| You can follow Kelly on Twitter via @blinkfink182. |
A day of anxious waiting and nervous joking for Devils’ fans ended after 5 p.m. today, when they learned systems arbitrator Richard Bloch (a New Jersey native) upheld the NHL’s rejection of Ilya Kovalchuk’s 17-year, $102 million contract agreement with the Devils.
When the news first broke, I wanted to fire off an angry post about NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and the decision. I was going to rant and rave about Marian Hossa, Henrik Zetterberg, and the other players who signed similar deals.
But, when it comes down to it, Bloch made a decision that wasn’t much of a surprise, and the league finally made headway into putting these long-term deals to bed. Read after the jump for my continued reaction of the arbitrator's ruling on Kovalchuk's grievance.
While thinking about all the outcomes of today’s ruling, I explored what the consequences would be if Bloch ruled in favor of the NHL. The biggest issue is that Kovalchuk now becomes an unrestricted free agent. The Los Angeles Kings reportedly offered the left-winger a 15-year, $80 million contract before he signed with the Devils. The Kontinental Hockey League already said they will offer Kovalchuk a 17-year deal, giving him the choice of sign with any team he wishes.
The main problem with the ruling is the fact that Kovalchuk will become an unrestricted free agent. Now, the Devils must compete with other teams in order to re-sign the star left-winger. While I think both sides will go back to the drawing board and cut some years off the back end, which drives up the cap hit per season. That seems like the most likely situation, as Kovalchuk seemed to want to be a Devil for the rest of his career. While it’s not an automatic re-signing, I would assume Kovalchuk re-signing for less years, equal money is still the likeliest of scenarios to occur.
**********
When you break it all down, the reason for the rejection was the back end of the deal. Kovalchuk would have made $95 million in the first ten years of the deal, but only $550,000 per season over the last six seasons. In ten years, that may not even be the veterans’ minimum for a contract. It’s that large discrepancy in pay that will probably become one of the sticking points for Bloch’s decision.
This isn’t the end of Kovalchuk in a Devils’ sweater. Clearly, both sides will have to re-negotiate to get him back in the organization. Even if you’re upset that the league won, the contract did border on lines of insanity. There hasn’t been a release of Bloch’s decision, and I’m sure there will be plenty to talk about when those documents are released. For now, we only have this quote from league deputy commissioner Bill Daly.
“We want to thank arbitrator Bloch for his prompt resolution of a complex issue,” Daly said in a statement. “His ruling is consistent with the League’s view of the manner in which the Collective Bargaining Agreement should deal with contracts that circumvent the Salary Cap.”
As more news comes out, there will be more to react to. But, for now, I’m not surprised that Bloch rejected the deal. We’ll see the exact reasons why soon, but the Devils must now go back to the drawing board with Kovalchuk.
Photo Credit: Mel Evans/AP Photo [runningwiththedevils2]
From the Free Press:
"Marian and I grew up here, we raised our family here and we built our businesses here. Detroit is our home. When I read in the paper there was the chance that this great sports town could lose one of its professional sports franchises, I just didn’t see how we could let that happen.
The
You all know I love sports - all sports, from amateur sports to the various pro sports we’ve had the privilege to be involved with, and like a lot of others I’m sure, I really want to see the Pistons remain the Detroit
We believe we could bring a lot to the table that could be tremendously positive for the Pistons franchise, the
How can you not love this man? This is the guy who used to give away free cars at Detroit Red Wings games. He's the one who decided to up the Tigers' pay-roll and bring in a winner when the city was at its most desperate economic times. He's the one who decided to give the fountain at Comerica Park to the three domestic automakers...at NO CHARGE.
He loves Detroit without excuses and without exceptions. He has done nothing but pump his own money into our sports teams, and the community in general to help our beloved city survive.
Mike Ilitch - greatest sports franchise owner ever. When it's all said and done, there better be a giant statue of this guy erected in downtown Detroit large enough to see from afar.
He's done more for this city than most of our politicians put together (okay...that might not be saying much). A class act all the way. Move the Pistons back to city? I love the idea - even if it means the Wings have to share a building with them.
Ilitch is putting in every conceivable effort to bring Detroit back to it's former greatness...and we all dig it.
Mike - we all love you.
Even before the regular season ended there was speculation about whether or not Anaheim Ducks winger, Teemu Selanne, was going to retire. After the season ended (early for the Ducks, as they did not make the playoffs), speculation continued.
Plenty of questions and hypotheses were raised by fans and experts alike. Would Selanne, who turned 40 in July, still want to play? Would the injuries that have kept him from playing a full 82 games the past two seasons factor into his decision? Was Selanne waiting to see what GM Bob Murray would do with the team before making a decision? Was Selanne only interested in playing if the Ducks were going to be competitive? Would he retire if the team appeared to be rebuilding? Would he only play if fellow unrestricted free agent and former linemate, Paul Kariya, were signed as well?
So much speculation, so little real information.
The most recent "possible" news comes from the Finnish source, The Sports Journal. Selanne is reported as saying in an interview that he has finally made a decision to continue his career and that "negotiations are now ready to begin.”
When the Ducks organization was contacted by the Orange County Register, Finnish sources looked less concrete. A spokesman stated that a decision was close from Selanne, but had not yet been made.
Further muddying the waters is that The Sports Journal also stated Selanne had spoken to Kariya, who was allegedly waiting on Selanne's decision.
Many Ducks fans are torn - their love and adoration for Selanne, who has to be the most amiable and fan-friendly athlete ever, is bar none. However, if Selanne comes as a package deal with Kariya, that love and loyalty might be tested. Many hardcore fans still harbor great resentment over how Kariya left the Ducks organization in 2003, after going to game 7 in the Stanley Cup Finals and promising the Ducks would be back there next year, only with different results. Fans took it quite personally at the time and the idea of Kariya returning to a Ducks uniform leaves many with a case of indigestion.
For other fans, who are either less attached to their team or have figured out how to separate business from personal, there is some anticipation of the undeniable chemistry that Kariya and Selanne had when they played together for five years. If that chemistry is still there, they could produce some of the offense that the team was missing last season.
For now, fans have to wait until things are concrete. Until then, cautious optimism at Selanne's return is called for.
Yesterday morning, my wife was a last-minute scratch for church. (Not a healthy scratch mind you, even Keenan wouldn't allow a player to suit up with her symptoms.) This decision was made a mere four minutes before we were about to walk out the door. The rest of the team (read: Hextall454 and his two kids) were just about to head out, and with that kind of momentum, you don't cancel the game. (Formal dress ankle tape takes FOREVER to unwrap.) So there I was, playing on a line whose combined ages are less than Bobby Orr's number, off to a place where the objective is to keep quiet as possible.
Many of you have yet to require the important skill of kid wrangling, but at church, it's a moral imperative that you don't suck at it. The 3-year old can be placated as long as she has tasks to do; you haven't seen asymmetrical book stacking of this quality since Ghostbusters. However, you can't just give a 3-month old work. A 3-month old gives YOU work. And considering we have a 3-month old who hates sitting in a car seat like Marian Gabork does playing defense, it's a full 60 minute effort. But that's not where this outing became blog worthy.
When the final horn sounded, I reflected back on the Mass. Neither child spontaneously combusted. At no point did either spit up their insides onto a nearby parishoners. Neither attained a decibel level that could disrupt the proceedings. It was a success. 2 on 1? Bring it on.
Afterwards, I was chatting with some woman who noticed that I was a guy with two kids and no help. Her comment:
"I have to say I'm impressed. I didn't hear either of your kids the whole time!"
My response:
"Looks like I'm pretty good at killing penalties."
Her response:
/blank look and mild horror
I then realized that there's a possibility that not every person in the world has a rudimentary knowledge of basic sports terminology. Furthermore, being in the Washington metropolitan area hampers that knowledge due to an interest in the hometwon hockey team that only became real in the last three years. So when I was greeted by STUNNED SILENCE, I thought about my words a little more.
"good at killing penalties."
Crap, I'm in a church. In church, penalties is not a word that exactly jives with the teachings of Jesus Christ. In fact, I'm sure Jesus would prefer the opposite of penalties out of you. Penalties mean you are being reprimanded for doing something wrong, and if there's anyone in recorded history that likely has a say in the matter of right and wrong, it's the Son of God. (Do you think Matt Cooke wouldn't elbow so many people in the head if he had to sit next to a diving being in the sin bin?) Oh and then there's that other word: KILL. Pretty sure that's a no brainer. When in church, it's probably not the best move to pronounce your proficiency in killing anything, penalties or otherwise. So in retrospect, I should have taken a cue from Mike Birbiglia and said...nothing.
Or at the very least, tried to explain I write about Hockey Jesus for a living.
Chris Kuc of the Chicago Tribune has reported that the Blackhawks will walk away from Antti Niemi's arbitration decision and sign Marty Turco. Turco's deal is for one year, but the terms have not been disclosed yet. Niemi is now an unrestricted free agent.
Niemi was a goalie that fit well into the Hawks system. He had the ability to go long stretches without seeing any shots and then "turning it on" and making a few big, flashy saves in rapid succession. Unfortunately, the Blackhawks brass decided that they would rather round out the defensive corps with some better talent to play in front of Turco.
I personally felt that Niemi was overrated due to the defense in front of him. His even strength save percentage was below replacement level (Replacement level = the level of play of a guy you could pick up on waivers or a marginal NHLer). The cap hit was simply too high to give a guy who hasn't even played half of a season in the NHL yet and would command another raise next offseason. There isn't enough of a market to warrant a sign and trade and the Hawks likely needed the cap flexibility to sign Turco.
Good luck to Nemo as he trys to find work somewhere in the NHL. It'll be very difficult because most teams are not looking for another goalie and most don't have the cap space. Say hello to our friend Nikolai in Edmonton, Antti! Honestly, Niemi's agent Bill Zito screwed the pooch on this one.
Marty Turco is a guy coming off two tough years in Dallas. He had one of the worst defenses of the past decade in front of him. It'll be interesting to see if he can play with the mental consistency that Niemi brought. His puckhandling skills should work well with the speed that the Hawks have on the back end. Controlling pucks as they leave the zone is a big key to the puck possession system.
This probably leaves the door open for Corey Crawford to be groomed for the number one job in 2011-12. Turco will either play his way to a bigger contract with a different team or not play well enough to be re-signed by the Hawks. Crawford was a casualty of his contract last season, which ended up being the deciding factor between Niemi getting the job as the backup goalie out of camp. All reports had the two goalies playing at the same level through camp last offseason.
Count me as a supporter of this move. Niemi was overvalued by Hawks fans for his ability to make the big save. This was a decision made for the long term future. Don't forget the rock solid core the Blackhawks have moving forward.
[blackhawksdl2]Page 1 of 15
Latest Network Posts
