Contract Termination: Ilya Kovalchuk

[CharasLazyWrister]

Punished how? And why?



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.

Not sure how the point of my posts has gotten lost so easily in this thread. I am specifically debating a fan who says that because the contract has been terminated, it should be wiped clean off the books with no remaining cap hit. I am arguing that the cap hit remaining on the books has merit and is fair according to what played out and the Kings signing Kovy to that contract, and outbidding numerous others teams, last summer.

 

[TrufleShufle]

Not sure how the point of my posts has gotten lost so easily in this thread. I am specifically debating a fan who says that because the contract has been terminated, it should be wiped clean off the books with no remaining cap hit. I am arguing that the cap hit remaining on the books has merit and is fair according to what played out and the Kings signing Kovy to that contract, and outbidding numerous others teams, last summer.

I think you confused everyone by saying Kings should be penalized after it was established that they already have a cap penalty for next year.

One poster said something like , "They are on the hook for next year. Why do they need to be penalized?" Meaning why do they need to be penalized further. Then you went on to explain why you think they should be penalized with everyone assuming you wanted them penalized more than they already are.

Does this makes sense? Or do you know they are on the hook for next year but still think they need a bigger penalty? Not debating, just trying to end this if it was all a misunderstanding.

 

[redcard]

Not sure how the point of my posts has gotten lost so easily in this thread. I am specifically debating a fan who says that because the contract has been terminated, it should be wiped clean off the books with no remaining cap hit. I am arguing that the cap hit remaining on the books has merit and is fair according to what played out and the Kings signing Kovy to that contract, and outbidding numerous others teams, last summer.

I think the confusion is because the person you were originally responding to was asking another poster why LA should face additional punishment, when they already have to keep the cap hit, they were not arguing against the cap hit staying.

That being said, the only reason the cap hit is still on the books is because its an over 35 contract. If a team and player came to a mutual termination agreement on a contract that was signed before the player turned 35 the cap hit would be removed as well (barring any recapture penalties).

 

[Bandit]

Interesting, didn't know this was legal.
LA should be punished.

The Devils should be punished. Kovalchuck should still have 6 years left on the second bullshit contract he signed with New Jersey and never have become LA's problem in the first place...

 

[TrufleShufle]

The Devils should be punished. Kovalchuck should still have 6 years left on the second bull**** contract he signed with New Jersey and never have become LA's problem in the first place...

I've gone too far to go back and add an /s

 

[Mobiandi]

 

[48g90a138pts]

What the hell, this is the first I've ever heard of this. So all those junior teams in 90's and 2000's had ineligible/ illegal players on them.

Oh that's bad if true.

 

[LD29]

So, Ovechkin is 36? This is nothing but bull$hit. There isn't even ANY reliable russian source about that thing.

 

[ViD]

Slava Malamud absolutely lost his credibility lately after he was denied the Caps accreditation and his sole goal nowadays is spew bullshit anti Russian agenda.

if you take a look at his tweets they are incredibly one sided in his attempts to belittle, humiliate and simply hate Russian sports, politics etc.

Don’t take him serious.

 

[Nedarb]

So you are telling us he played in the nhl at what, age 16? Haha okay.

 

[Kurrilino]

So you are telling us he played in the nhl at what, age 16? Haha okay.

I thinks it would be the other way. Played at age of 20 having a certificate to be 18

 

[themelkman]

Slava Malamud absolutely lost his credibility lately after he was denied the Caps accreditation and his sole goal nowadays is spew bull**** anti Russian agenda.

if you take a look at his tweets they are incredibly one sided in his attempts to belittle, humiliate and simply hate Russian sports, politics etc.

Don’t take him serious.

I hate the Russian government as much as anyone but the guy thinks he knows everything and barely talks about hockey anymore

 

[benedictTavares]

Russia has never been known to systematically cheat in sports on the world stage.

It happened numerous times in baseball. I have no problem believing it has happened in the NHL.

 

[kp61c]

Nice timing, lol. I have never heard of it. It would be nice see some proof behind these speculations.

 

[ViD]

Nice timing, lol. I have never heard of it. It would be nice see some prove behind these speculations.

By the way I don’t know what he means by “it’s known in Russia” as I’ve never heard this allegation about Kovy before

 

[KingPuckChoo]

So you are telling us he played in the nhl at what, age 16? Haha okay.

I thinks it would be the other way. Played at age of 20 having a certificate to be 18

LOL!

 

[BlackFrancis]

Nice timing, lol. I have never heard of it. It would be nice see some prove behind these speculations.

Mobile phones have cameras, so he has no excuse for not having a snapshot of the birth certificate if he saw it.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I think you confused everyone by saying Kings should be penalized after it was established that they already have a cap penalty for next year.

One poster said something like , "They are on the hook for next year. Why do they need to be penalized?" Meaning why do they need to be penalized further. Then you went on to explain why you think they should be penalized with everyone assuming you wanted them penalized more than they already are.

Does this makes sense? Or do you know they are on the hook for next year but still think they need a bigger penalty? Not debating, just trying to end this if it was all a misunderstanding.

Nope. The way it is is fine for me. Not advocating a penalty any more or less.

 

[Lt Dan]

Interesting, didn't know this was legal.
.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I think the confusion is because the person you were originally responding to was asking another poster why LA should face additional punishment, when they already have to keep the cap hit, they were not arguing against the cap hit staying.

That being said, the only reason the cap hit is still on the books is because its an over 35 contract. If a team and player came to a mutual termination agreement on a contract that was signed before the player turned 35 the cap hit would be removed as well (barring any recapture penalties).

Yeah, that’s actually something I learned here today. I consider my hockey knowledge to be quite vast, with one of the exceptions being the salary cap.

Is that 35+ rule specifically for situations like this? Because a situation like this is more likely with an older player?

 

[ThePhoenixx]

Kings are going to have a whopping $11m in cap tied up in the 20-21 season between Kovalchuk, Phaneuf, and Richards, with no LTIR magic wand available to wash any of it away.

Don't think they care.

 

[TrufleShufle]

Yeah, that’s actually something I learned here today. I consider my hockey knowledge to be quite vast, with one of the exceptions being the salary cap.

Is that 35+ rule specifically for situations like this? Because a situation like this is more likely with an older player?

Yea, because guys over 35 are more likely to retire before their contracts are up. IMO it's to stop guys just getting paid in their glory years and cutting out whenever they feel like it. It's really unlikely that players and teams will agree to terminate a contract at any young age in the players career.

 

[BudBundy]

I want Kovalchuks agent to work for me. How he/they suckered both the Devils and the Kings into those contracts is just hilarious. The Kings contract, in particular, was such a joke before the ink even dried to the point that even casual fans were laughing at it. Good thing the Kings suck and cap space is irrelevant for a while.

 

[sdf]

Don’t take him serious.

Oh okay

 

[redcard]

Yeah, that’s actually something I learned here today. I consider my hockey knowledge to be quite vast, with one of the exceptions being the salary cap.

Is that 35+ rule specifically for situations like this? Because a situation like this is more likely with an older player?

Not exactly but it works the same, the 35+ rule was created to stop teams from tacking on extra years at low salary to artificially lower the cap hit and then having the player retire before the final years. I.E. if a player wanted a 3 year, 15 mil contract they could add a 4th year at 1 mil which would lower the cap hit from 5M to 4M (15 over 3 years vs 16 over 4 years) and then retire after 3 years. The 35+ rule means that the cap hit stays for the 4th year even if the player retires. Of course, the loophole is just to claim a degenerative injury (which isn't much of a stretch for an old NHL player) and go on LTIR for the final year but that's a different problem.

So its effectively the same, mutual termination vs retirement, the difference is the termination allows Kovalchuk to sign with another team.