Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BRUINS420. Show BRUINS420's posts

    Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    Everyone isn't thinking about the draft picks and the fine against our cap the NHL will give to us if Savards deal is voided.The entire reson way the Devils havent made any moves yet is the NHL is coming down with a fine against there cap and how many picks there going to lose.

    Do you think if the NHL fines and takes picks away from the devils that wont happen to the Bruins?? Your dead wrong!!

    So we lose Savard for nothing,we now lose maybe 2 first round picks and the NHL fines us 4 million against our cap!! Yes please void Savards deal NHL!!

    AGAIN WE DONT WANT SAVARDS DEAL VOIDED!!

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from captainbergeron. Show captainbergeron's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    how about a link about CAP fines and draft pick penalties pending?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    CB,
    I saw a few links that the league has not decided if they would take further action, I would side on the idea that they probably won't, and if so I do not think it will be in all of those manners, I would guess it will be a fine, or draft picks.. not both..

    I don't think they do either though if you look at the leagues examples (though no limited to) none of those examples actually involve manipulating the cap by extending contracts.. They involve setting up "endorsements" that would be above market value (to offset a lower nhl contract for instance) or having an "agreed" upon retirement age.. but nothing that states a contract can not be intended to extend well past a players normal retirement or something like that..

    I think voiding this deal will make teams think twice before trying something similar, and also gives them a start point to define this in the next CBA, it would be hard to now fine a team for violating the CBA when the contract was originally accpeted.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsYear. Show BruinsYear's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    In Response to Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY:
    Everyone isn't thinking about the draft picks and the fine against our cap the NHL will give to us if Savards deal is voided.The entire reson way the Devils havent made any moves yet is the NHL is coming down with a fine against there cap and how many picks there going to lose. Do you think if the NHL fines and takes picks away from the devils that wont happen to the Bruins?? Your dead wrong!! So we lose Savard for nothing,we now lose maybe 2 first round picks and the NHL fines us 4 million against our cap!! Yes please void Savards deal NHL!! AGAIN WE DONT WANT SAVARDS DEAL VOIDED!!
    Posted by BRUINS420


    Complete B.S...Smoke another one.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RMiller87. Show RMiller87's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    More smoke and mirrors...

    The NHL won't likely do anything about the Hossa, Lecavalier, Luongo, Savard and Pronger contracts because the NHL brass have no balls...

    I bet that this was all done because Buttman really wants Kovalchick down in the City of Angels trying to sell hockey in the Sunbelt...

      

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BRUINS420. Show BRUINS420's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    n Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY:
    In Response to Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY : Complete B.S...Smoke another one.
    Posted by BruinsYear


    Bs? smoke another one?? LoL do you follow hockey? Read every single hockey site there is that knows anything about hockey news TSN, ESPN, SPORTSNET.CA there all reporting the Devils will be hit with something.

    So the Devils get fined and lose picks but the Bruins don't  lose anything doing the same thing thats going to look fair,you always get away with things in NHL,NFL,NBA when you cheat...Thats what The ruling said''these contracts are''! Stick to watching baseball  Moron
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from kylequinn. Show kylequinn's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    We cant lose out first round picks, we bamboosled toronto fair and square....I lead a very miseable lonely life, and watching toronto come last again are my only current asperations lol.

    however, if the nhl decides to void the contract, we shouldent be fined as we diddent know....do he goes to FAs, and we re-sign him for less;)..

    its just a bunch of milionaires fighting with Millionares, ive always said if we had a socialist approach, then our players would play the sport for the love of the game, and the love for having fans cheer them on, and provided a level of entertainment to the rest of the comunity inwhich a father can bring his boy to a game. they players would only make their 40k a year, and wouldent want more because money is a mere formalitym as were working for one another, and not consumption and greed...


    ill stop there, as im going to get some republican backlash, ;)

    Go Bruins
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from wallydouglas. Show wallydouglas's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    The league can not and will not fine, punish or even think about any action that will harm a team, they know with the current cba can be voided also, causing the possibility of an undue and unwanted strike by the players and the association. All the league is doing is trying to is fine tune some rules and regulations that are not set in stone and very unclear. Theres always a loophole that either side uses to there advantage and the GMs have using it at this point. Saying all this, all the nhl wants is to lose those loopholes.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from NumbaFouwer. Show NumbaFouwer's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    The only thing I can see the League doing is to force these contracts to be treated like 35+ contracts (the cap hits stay on the clubs books until the end of the contracts, just like these clubs are maintaining).
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    In Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY:
    The only thing I can see the League doing is to force these contracts to be treated like 35+ contracts (the cap hits stay on the clubs books until the end of the contracts, just like these clubs are maintaining).
    Posted by NumbaFouwer


    That would be a good point, but would still be a modification to the current CBA, which would not be allowed, it may be something that they address at the next bargaining agreement,  but not right now.

    The fact is there probably isnt anything they can really do at this point, but they have now sent a message, and i think teams moving foward will be aware of how they structure these deals.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Blackmale. Show Blackmale's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    In Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY:
    More smoke and mirrors... The NHL won't likely do anything about the Hossa, Lecavalier, Luongo, Savard and Pronger contracts because the NHL brass have no balls... I bet that this was all done because Buttman really wants Kovalchick down in the City of Angels trying to sell hockey in the Sunbelt...   
    Posted by RMiller87

    Probably right. I don't know what that man's obsession with spreading hockey where people aren't intereted is, but he is really f***ing things up lately.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from carloaz. Show carloaz's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

      Kylequinn my better judgement says ignore the rubbish you said but I was eating    dinner when I read that... working for one another???
    I would say you are in for American backlash... I will put my own food on my table thank, I know how communists with those who disagree... I apologize to the rest of you but...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mutant211. Show Mutant211's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    In Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY:
    I bet that this was all done because Buttman really wants Kovalchick down in the City of Angels trying to sell hockey in the Sunbelt...   
    Posted by RMiller87

    Ridiculous. 

    The Kings have been in the league for 43 years.  While they haven't had much success in those 43 years, they are a team on the rise even without Kovalchuk.  The Devils are in probably in worse shape than the Kings are.  It looked like the Kings had more fans in the seats of their home games than the Devils did in their brand new arena last season. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

        "down in the City of Angels trying to sell hockey in the Sunbelt"

    Too bad the Sunbelt is nowhere near Los Angeles and it's been renamed the "Bushbelt". Lombardi is smart he won't over pay for Kovalchuk the Kings are fine without him.

    "So we lose Savard for nothing,we now lose maybe 2 first round picks and the NHL fines us 4 million against our cap."

    Not going to happen I have not read or heard that anywhere good grief!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BigNickster. Show BigNickster's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    why should there be penalties against the teams that negoatiated agreements that the league agreed to HELLO.
    worst case scenario should be as follows
    league realizes that they didn't do their job TO THEIR FULL CAPACITY to protect all the other teams
    so they allow what has happened, but compensates other teams that didn't get the advantage
    they should appoligize and move on

    stupid to think that the league should have the power to over turn what they agreed to so late after the fact and now start to punish these teams

    I have lots to say and it has nothing about what is fair about BOSTON
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from No4BobbyOrr-GOAT. Show No4BobbyOrr-GOAT's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    Bettman apologize, Too funny.

    He has the start of Parkinsons with his constant head shaking, but he also has the POWER and he will do whatever he wants because he thinks he is god.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsYear. Show BruinsYear's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    How about you post a link? I have seen nothing about picks being some kind of fine for a  bad contract.

    post one of the articles you speak of from TSN,ESPN or sportsnet saying anything about 2 first round picks or ANY picks...
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    The NHL has the power to penalize teams with fines or losses of picks. 

    If the B's are found to be guilty of cap circumvention, they will be penalized.  They won't be penalized for $4M of cap space, and they certainly won't lose two first round picks.  A penalty like that is akin to Chiarelli and Julien getting caught with 100lbs of coke and then visiting the Tate ranch.


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dc-bruins-fan. Show dc-bruins-fan's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    Two things about a fine or any penalty beyond voiding the contract:

    1) It would be so hypocritical of the league to fine these teams or penalize them beyond having the contracts voided. If the league investigated these contracts (Bill Daly is on the record saying as much), then they came to a conclusion that there was no circumvention at some point (even if that judgment changed over time). To penalize teams who exercised the same judgment would be hilarious.

    2) A fine would be justified in addition to withdrawing registration of a contract if there were some new facts that came to light OR there was evidence that the team intended to circumvent the contract. For example, and we'll use the B's, if the league found out that Krejci's sweetheart deal was because Jacobs actually slid the kid $2MM under the table. A fine would be justified in this case because there would be circumvention, the league would not have known about it at the time they approved the contract, and this action would almost certainly suggest an intent to circumvent the cap.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from dc-bruins-fan. Show dc-bruins-fan's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    In Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY:
    n Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY : Bs? smoke another one?? LoL do you follow hockey? Read every single hockey site there is that knows anything about hockey news TSN, ESPN, SPORTSNET.CA there all reporting the Devils will be hit with something. So the Devils get fined and lose picks but the Bruins don't  lose anything doing the same thing thats going to look fair,you always get away with things in NHL,NFL,NBA when you cheat...Thats what The ruling said''these contracts are''! Stick to watching baseball  Moron
    Posted by BRUINS420


    In the case of the Devils and Kovalchuk (no prior registration of the contract), a fine would be, in my opinion, unjustified without evidence of intent to circumvent because the contract could only be finalized pending league approval. Unlike the other times the league fines players/teams (dirty hits, inappropriate comments, unprofessional behavior, tampering, etc.), there was zero damage done to the league by what the Devils did, even if you believe damage would have occurred had the deal gone through.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    I don't think any of these teams will be fined, the teams have to knowingly circumvent the cap, and while NJ knowingly was manipulating it, none of the "examples" given remotely address these kind of scenarios, the NHL did not really foresee teams giving out 15y deals with front loaded contracts, they addressed the idea that teams may underpay these guys in their salary, and come up with creative solutions to get the player the rest of their money.. Think David Beckhams deal with the Galaxy, MLS cant cover 25m a year, but they can if his contract includes 22m of endorsements....
     I think the NHL would have to rule that NJ was following a pattern of contracts that have been approved, though extending it to the next level..They were clearly operating with in the rules of the CBA, but in a matter that was against the "spirit" of the CBA..
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from RMiller87. Show RMiller87's posts

    Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY

    In Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY:
    In Response to Re: Saving cap room if SAVARDS deal isn't allowed=NO WAY : Ridiculous.  The Kings have been in the league for 43 years.  While they haven't had much success in those 43 years, they are a team on the rise even without Kovalchuk.  The Devils are in probably in worse shape than the Kings are.  It looked like the Kings had more fans in the seats of their home games than the Devils did in their brand new arena last season. 
    Posted by Mutant211


    Who cares how many fans were in the seats ?

    You think that Beckham actually packs them in for the LA Galaxy.

    Bettman wants the known entities marketing the sport in places where the general population couldn't care less about hockey.

    He sold the Phoenix Coyotes for much less than was offered just to keep them bleeding cash in the desert.

    I think he's got a little man, god complex.  

    If Bettman hadn't wanted Kovalchuk in Los Angeles, I bet that none of this would have happened.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share