It’s been a couple days since the ruling on Ilya Kovalchuk’s 17-year contract with the New Jersey Devils came down, which sided in favor of league’s grievance. Richard Bloch, the abattoir arbitrator, got it right. Kovalchuk’s contract was an obvious attempt to circumvent the salary cap. He would be 44 when his contract expires, and in the final five season’s of the deal he was slated to make $550,000, lowering his cap hit significantly. So, the league made an example of the Kovalchuk deal in an attempt to put the kybosh on deals such as these in the future.
Well, Bloch listed Marian Hossa’s 12-year contract he signed last year as one of four players – footnoted in the 20-page document – with contracts that resemble that of Kovalchuk’s. This, of course, had the natives clamoring that the sky is falling, once again – running around in a state of fear, much like chicken does when its head is cut off. They take to twitter to spread panic, and feed on articles written by fear mongers such as Larry Brooks (I hate myself for giving this guy some clicks). The natives do this before having one original, rational thought.
The league would be doing themselves a great disservice if they opted repeal Hossa’s contract. He already played one season on his deal. Just imaging the league-wide fallout it would create. It could potentially turn into a witch-hunt. The league had its chance to voice air and grievances regarding any contract before they approve it – like they did with Ilya Kovalchuk.
Bill Daly, the leagues deputy sheriff, already investigated the Hossa deal after it was approved last summer, but the story seemed to vanish into thin air. A month later, the league approved Luongo’s questionable long-term contract with the Canucks. Although some reports say contracts such as these are still under investigation, consider everything prior to Monday’s ruling grandfathered in to the new era.
Loading ...
