So, I had this whole long post planned out the day the Kovalchuk contract was signed. It said things like "this isn't about how unreasonably long it is, this is about how it should be illegal." Blah blah blah, average of 10 million a year for the first 8 years, average 1 million a year for the final 7 years, ends when he's 44, clearly bullshit designed to circumvent the cap, etc.
Then I was busy with work, and by the next day, the NHL had actually ruled the thing illegal, which I totally didn't see coming, but it would have made for a nice, exciting story arc on the blog. But because that first post didn't happen, now I'm just writing about what everyone else on the planet is writing about: "ZOMG, the NHL says the contract is bad!"
Whatever. I actually think it's kinda interesting that now, Lamoriello is kinda saying he knew this would happen. Like his response wasn't "damn you NHL I liked that contract" so much as it was "yeah, well - your crazy CBA* says it's legal, so maybe that's flawed." Meanwhile, there's a rumor that the NHLPA might actually come to bat for Kovalchuk and dispute the ruling.
Oh my god come on. We already have a league where there are so many rules in place to benefit individual players that it is almost impossible for a GM to build a team out of the same guys every year. How could the NHLPA possibly think that allowing a contract like this is acceptable? Wanna lock up a great player for lots of money, but don't like the salary cap? Just double his contract, and pay him nothing at the end! He'll retire before then, and you get off free! As long as the contract wasn't signed after he turned 35, we don't care if he's 58 when it ends!
I really hope the NHLPA doesn't take this case. Although in fairness, I'd probably personally find the whole thing more hilarious and less depressing if I wasn't unrelatedly thinking about Marc Staal the whole time.
No comments:
Post a Comment