Confirmed with Link: Nichushkin back in assistance program; suspended a minimum of six months

[henchman21]

But since reinstatement at that point is not guaranteed, I imagine the league would work more closely with the team on a solution. Say...just not reinstate Nuke until the following season (2026/27) allowing whatever fix we put in place to remain there until the offseason.

Not really up to the league. The NHLPA would fight that once he’s ready, he’s ready. Especially with money at stake.

 

[tigervixxxen]

A big risk in allowing Nuke to come back is that is 100% shuts the door on Drouin returning. Now what happens if there is no Drouin, Landy winds up being terrible, and Nuke screws up again? We might end up with Wood and LOC flanking Mitts. Thats a team that is at risk if missing the playoffs.

Think of all that deadline money if Nuke has to go away for the year

 

[expatriatedtexan]

Not really up to the league. The NHLPA would fight that once he’s ready, he’s ready. Especially with money at stake.

That's weird when the alternative at that point is the league can also say, f*** off, you're done. He's not entitled to come back after his next strike.

 

[henchman21]

That's weird when the alternative at that point is the league can also say, f*** off, you're done. He's not entitled to come back after his next strike.

He’s also not barred. He has to follow the program, but if he does, he has the right to return.

 

[Bender]

His cap won't be gone entirely.

How did the San Jose Sharks sign E.Kane to a 7x7 contract and get out of it completely with no cap penalty??

 

[hockeyfish]

How did the San Jose Sharks sign E.Kane to a 7x7 contract and get out of it completely with no cap penalty??

They didn't.

Evander Kane, Sharks settle contract grievance

The San Jose Sharks and former forward Evander Kane have settled a grievance over his contract termination last season before the matter would have gone to arbitration.

www.espn.com

 

[Bender]

They didn't.

Evander Kane, Sharks settle contract grievance

The San Jose Sharks and former forward Evander Kane have settled a grievance over his contract termination last season before the matter would have gone to arbitration.

www.espn.com

Only for that season. Cap friendly shows no cap penalty for E.Kane on the sharks.

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years

www.capfriendly.com

Just googled it :

San jose sharks evander kane cap penalty​

The San Jose Sharks and Evander Kane reached a settlement in his grievance case, which resulted in a one-time cash payment to Kane and a retroactive cap penalty applied to the 2021-22 season. This penalty will not affect the Sharks’ current or future salary cap situations.
Key Points:

• Kane will receive a one-time payment from the Sharks, reportedly around $2.5 million, to make him whole for the contract termination.
• The cap penalty will be applied retroactively to the 2021-22 season, which means the Sharks will not incur any additional penalties or cap hits moving forward.
• The Sharks had approximately $4.97 million in salary cap space at the end of the 2021-22 season, and the cap penalty will be applied to that amount, leaving them with no cap consequences.

 

[henchman21]

Only for that season. Cap friendly shows no cap penalty for E.Kane on the sharks.

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years

www.capfriendly.com

CF doesn’t have everything. They didnt have Perry’s this season. Though I think kanes was only two. It’s not impossible to get out from all of it… just a battle

 

[hockeyfish]

Only for that season. Cap friendly shows no cap penalty for E.Kane on the sharks.

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years

www.capfriendly.com

Yes. In this case, Kane had already signed a new contract, so SJ could mae the argument that the only damages were the differences in contracts. If somehow the Avs terminated Nuke and he signed a new contract for 35.5 million, the argument could be made that no damages were done and no penelty would happen. But that seems very unlikely.

 

[Bender]

Yes. In this case, Kane had already signed a new contract, so SJ could mae the argument that the only damages were the differences in contracts. If somehow the Avs terminated Nuke and he signed a new contract for 35.5 million, the argument could be made that no damages were done and no penelty would happen. But that seems very unlikely.

Not sure what having signed a new contract with the Oilers has anything to do with the fact that the league imposed practically ZERO cap penalty for the 3 years he had remaining on his deal.

For me, there are 2 separate things - one is the settlement where Nuke gets a bunch of cash or not - I don't give a rats ass if he gets all of it or none of it... And the CAP penalty - now that's the one I do care about.

For the Kane situation, there was a breach of contract, mutual agreement to terminate and then the league decided to give the Sharks a pass on the CAP penalty for the final 3 years on that contract.

I'd like to know why? ...and why would the Avs be subject to a multi-year CAP penalty - as some have suggested - in their case?

 

[hockeyfish]

Not sure what having signed a new contract with the Oilers has anything to do with the fact that the league imposed practically ZERO cap penalty for the 3 years he had remaining on his deal.

For me, there are 2 separate things - one is the settlement where Nuke gets a bunch of cash or not - I don't give a rats ass if he gets all of it or none of it... And the CAP penalty - now that's the one I do care about.

For the Kane situation, there was a breach of contract, mutual agreement to terminate and then the league decided to give the Sharks a pass on the CAP penalty for the final 3 years on that contract.

I'd like to know why? ...and why would the Avs be subject to a multi-year CAP penalty - as some have suggested - in their case?

Because cap hits are calculated only for payments retlated to the year that the payments were made. In this case, it seems that the payment was a lump sum that was counted toward the previous years payroll and cap. There were no payments made in future years, so there were no further cap hits.

The reality here is that, unlike buyouts, there are no standard accounting. The team and NHLPA can negotiate a settlement in an real fashon they want.

 

[cinchronicity]

Not sure what having signed a new contract with the Oilers has anything to do with the fact that the league imposed practically ZERO cap penalty for the 3 years he had remaining on his deal.

For me, there are 2 separate things - one is the settlement where Nuke gets a bunch of cash or not - I don't give a rats ass if he gets all of it or none of it... And the CAP penalty - now that's the one I do care about.

For the Kane situation, there was a breach of contract, mutual agreement to terminate and then the league decided to give the Sharks a pass on the CAP penalty for the final 3 years on that contract.

I'd like to know why? ...and why would the Avs be subject to a multi-year CAP penalty - as some have suggested - in their case?

My understanding is that there WAS a cap penalty, applied retroactively. Since the Sharks had open cap room in the retroactive years, there was no overage or further cap penalty. The Avs did not have any cap room this past year. They do not have the same luxury.

Compounding the issue is that Kane's termination came - technically - from faking Covid tests. He did not have the potential to fake his vaccination record again ( since the mandate was over) so the Oilers had no reason to worry about Kane's recidivism. Should Nuke come back and fool some GM into paying him over $6.125M AAV, then the Avs have a shot to use Kane as a precedent in their argument. That said, what GM is going to pay Nuke MORE than he is currently making?

 

[niwotsblessing]

So, the NHLPA will fight tooth and nail to keep a drug addict in the league, but does f*** all about head shots? (Looking at you Jamie Benn, Jacob Trouba, and so forth.)

Fvck the NHLPA.

 

[Vaslof]

So, the NHLPA will fight tooth and nail to keep a drug addict in the league, but does f*** all about head shots? (Looking at you Jamie Benn, Jacob Trouba, and so forth.)

Fvck the NHLPA.

They represent the players. Think of it like a lawyer defending someone who's guilty.

 

[Vaslof]

Sure it increases the chances, but it would still be challenged and end up in mediation.

This is true, but you have to remember there are two sides to the negotiation. The players must adhere to their side of the contract. When one side is innocent and the other guilty, it would be a weird outcome for the innocent to be harshly penalized for nothing. I see it as more likely that Nuke gets paid some amount of his future salary and the Avs don't take a cap hit.

 

[henchman21]

This is true, but you have to remember there are two sides to the negotiation. The players must adhere to their side of the contract. When one side is innocent and the other guilty, it would be a weird outcome for the innocent to be harshly penalized for nothing. I see it as more likely that Nuke gets paid some amount of his future salary and the Avs don't take a cap hit.

First, the Avs are not innocent. Second, it is a contract that the NHLPA will have to try to protect.

This is all why I think the parties will get together to find a way out. It is in everyone’s best interest.

 

[hockeyfish]

This is true, but you have to remember there are two sides to the negotiation. The players must adhere to their side of the contract. When one side is innocent and the other guilty, it would be a weird outcome for the innocent to be harshly penalized for nothing. I see it as more likely that Nuke gets paid some amount of his future salary and the Avs don't take a cap hit.

Total cap spending calculations include any payments to players as part of settlements and grievences and such. So, it's not possible to pay Nuke some amount and not take a cap hit.

 

[Vaslof]

First, the Avs are not innocent. Second, it is a contract that the NHLPA will have to try to protect.

This is all why I think the parties will get together to find a way out. It is in everyone’s best interest.

What part of the contract did the Avs break?

 

[henchman21]

What part of the contract did the Avs break?

Not breaking the contract does not make them innocent. Their actions during and prior to the PAP would be a part of the case. They've let a lot slide with Nuke (and others) over the years.

 

[Vaslof]

Not breaking the contract does not make them innocent. Their actions during and prior to the PAP would be a part of the case. They've let a lot slide with Nuke (and others) over the years.

Would the NHLPA push the narrative that Avs weren't being harsh enough with the player? That seems counterproductive to their aims as it'd set precedent on how much players can get away with in the future.

 

[henchman21]

Would the NHLPA push the narrative that Avs weren't being harsh enough with the player? That seems counterproductive to their aims as it'd set precedent on how much players can get away with in the future.

They could easily say that he was enabled by staff and their actions contributed to his addiction.

 

[The Moops]

Would the NHLPA push the narrative that Avs weren't being harsh enough with the player? That seems counterproductive to their aims as it'd set precedent on how much players can get away with in the future.

They'll push whatever narrative will get Nuke as much money as possible. That's all there is to it

 

[Vaslof]

They'll push whatever narrative will get Nuke as much money as possible. That's all there is to it

Not at the cost of their other clients.

I also don't see how pushing for the Avs to get cap punishments helps Nuke or other players. If anything it makes it harder to come to a settlement since the Avs likely care more about the cap hit than the money lost.

 

[henchman21]

Not at the cost of their other clients.

I also don't see how pushing for the Avs to get cap punishments helps Nuke or other players. If anything it makes it harder to come to a settlement since the Avs likely care more about the cap hit than the money lost.

A unions purpose is to protect their members… Nuke is a member. Mitchell Miller got a settlement negotiated by the NHLPA. They are there to protect all members. The greater good is not a part of it.

 

[missionAvs]

f*** Nuke. Start the elimination game right now, the Nuke Crew has been disbanded.