Toggle sidebar

Contract Termination: Ilya Kovalchuk

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here
Tender Rip

Tender Rip

Wears long pants
Feb 12, 2007
18,003
5,237
Shanghai, China
CharasLazyWrister said:
Because your team outbid every other team a year and a half ago accepting the risk that he would not perform to the contract offered. That’s the risk you take.

Wiping it clean might be fair between LA and the NHL, but it wouldn’t be fair to the other 30 teams.
Click to expand...

What utter tripe. As if the punishment of carrying that cap-hit was not enough.
Just lucky for LA coffers that Kovy has made enough money for this to be feasible for him. Most other players would have obviously collected the dollars whether playing or not.
 
TrufleShufle

TrufleShufle

Registered User
Aug 31, 2012
8,152
13,094
CharasLazyWrister said:
Because your team outbid every other team a year and a half ago accepting the risk that he would not perform to the contract offered. That’s the risk you take.

Wiping it clean might be fair between LA and the NHL, but it wouldn’t be fair to the other 30 teams.
Click to expand...
The risk was Kovy would want the contract honored. And he could have said, nope, pay me. But he was ok with terminating it. How can two people mutually ending an agreement be punished?
 
  • Like
Reactions: go4hockey, kilowatt and smitty10
unicornpig

unicornpig

Registered User
Dec 8, 2017
3,706
5,437
lawrence said:
a coaches nightmare. .5 points a game as a top 6 winger is nothing to be proud of for a 6 million dollar guy. He's probably ignoring the coaches system. I will be surprised if any tea is dumb enough to take a shot on Kovy.
Click to expand...
yup, he think's he's still in atlanta.
 
CharasLazyWrister

CharasLazyWrister

Registered User
Sep 8, 2008
24,707
21,776
Northborough, MA
trufleshufle13 said:
The risk was Kovy would want the contract honored. And he could have said, nope, pay me. But he was ok with terminating it. How can two people mutually ending an agreement be punished?
Click to expand...

It just sets a bad precedent.

In an era where every team has to weigh their options as far as where they spend money on personnel, you can’t set any sort of expectation that if you outbid 30 other teams on the richest contract that you can wiggle out later on. Good for them for saving the actual cash, but letting them get completely out of it wouldn’t be right.
 
TrufleShufle

TrufleShufle

Registered User
Aug 31, 2012
8,152
13,094
CharasLazyWrister said:
It just sets a bad precedent.

In an era where every team has to weigh their options as far as where they spend money on personnel, you can’t set any sort of expectation that if you outbid 30 other teams on the richest contract that you can wiggle out later on. Good for them for saving the actual cash, but letting them get completely out of it wouldn’t be right.
Click to expand...
There is no expectation. It's how contracts work. If Panarin decided tomorrow he hated hockey and wanted out, and Rangers agreed, they would terminate the contract. The expectation for this was set with the invention of contracts.

If Kovy wanted to fight it, he could have. Kings don't have to play him, but they sure as hell have to pay him. If Kings still wanted Kovy to play, but Kovy was over it, Kovy wouldn't get paid and wouldn't be allowed to play anywhere else.

But again, they both agreed. It doesn't matter that you want the team to be punished. It's not how contracts work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kilowatt
Filatov2Kovalev2Bonk

Filatov2Kovalev2Bonk

Effortless sexy.
Jul 13, 2006
12,770
1,105
Cumberland
Wouldn't mind him in Ottawa, tbh.
We need more Russians and even admitting he's not a 40-goal guy, he could bring some needed swag to the room.
Plus local media yobs could make some kind of connection to Heatley and so on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mundyc3
BigKing

BigKing

Blake Out of Hell III: Back in to Hell
Mar 11, 2003
11,564
12,263
Belmont Shore, CA
google.com
CharasLazyWrister said:
It just sets a bad precedent.

In an era where every team has to weigh their options as far as where they spend money on personnel, you can’t set any sort of expectation that if you outbid 30 other teams on the richest contract that you can wiggle out later on. Good for them for saving the actual cash, but letting them get completely out of it wouldn’t be right.
Click to expand...

They aren't completely out of it: his cap hit remains.

The player could have stayed and the Kings would have just payed him the full amount and not played him. Only difference now is that they saved some actual dollars but they are still "penalized" with the cap hit.

They haven't wiggled out of anything. Terminating the Richards contract was wiggling out of something. This is a mutual agreement between team and player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wintersej and kilowatt
Dr Pepper

Dr Pepper

Registered User
Dec 9, 2005
71,157
16,720
Sunny Etobicoke
Dallas barely has any cap space (LTIR gives 'em just under $5 mil), but a shot in the arm offensively wouldn't hurt.

I get that Kovalchuk wouldn't necessarily be a cure-all, but maybe it'd give the team a much-needed boost seeing as how he'd come in as the leading active scorer on the team - by about 60 goals.

Dallas so far has only managed one more goal scored than the Kings have.....if not for their defense and goaltending the Stars would be right at the bottom of the West alongside LA.

Maybe he'd fit in as a middle-six option. :dunno:
 
Evgeny Oliker

Evgeny Oliker

Registered User
Mar 12, 2003
5,789
1,290
Visit site
Kovy could do well in Boston. They have a ton of forwards who play well defensively so Kovy won’t have to.

another option could be Pitt if they want to try him with Malkin.
 
CharasLazyWrister

CharasLazyWrister

Registered User
Sep 8, 2008
24,707
21,776
Northborough, MA
BigKing said:
They aren't completely out of it: his cap hit remains.

The player could have stayed and the Kings would have just payed him the full amount and not played him. Only difference now is that they saved some actual dollars but they are still "penalized" with the cap hit.

They haven't wiggled out of anything. Terminating the Richards contract was wiggling out of something. This is a mutual agreement between team and player.
Click to expand...

That is what I am arguing about. I am saying what is going on now is fair and making it so the Kings faced no cap hit upon contract termination wouldn’t be fair.
 
kilowatt

kilowatt

the vibes are not immaculate
Jan 1, 2009
18,554
21,442
trufleshufle13 said:
Interesting, didn't know this was legal.
LA should be punished.
Click to expand...

Punished how? And why?

CharasLazyWrister said:
Because your team outbid every other team a year and a half ago accepting the risk that he would not perform to the contract offered. That’s the risk you take.

Wiping it clean might be fair between LA and the NHL, but it wouldn’t be fair to the other 30 teams.
Click to expand...

Wiping what clean? The Kings are carrying a $6,250,000 cap hit next year for a player not on the roster. As mentioned previously, this probably benefits Kovalchuk more than it does Los Angeles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom