KaseMeOutside
Based
- Oct 18, 2011
- 44,094
- 9,729
A 17 year contract with no money at the end is a clear attempt at circumventing the cap.There was also no rule about signing a 27 year old to a 17 year contract, didn't stop the league from doing something about it.
Bob's said they're doing that, he just hasn't used that exact term, I don't think. He goes much further than that and the league is probably taking notice, especially if he's on the same page as the one you seem to be on.
A 17 year contract with no money at the end is a clear attempt at circumventing the cap.
Pure out tanking is an attempt at violating what? Find me one instance where the NHL has punished any teams for tanking or stating its intentions as such. Or even said so much as a peep about "don't do that." The worst they've done is because of Edmonton's ineptitude (they weren't even tanking), they adjusted the lottery in the future.
When has Bob has said anything of the sort. The best I can recall is something to the effect of "I think we can compete for the playoffs, but maybe we aren't a legit Cup contender at the moment." Then there's things like "guys need to be more accountable" "stand and be counted" etc. "The coach is doing fine." Acquiring vets like Grant, Del Zotto. Bringing back people like Perry, Kesler, etc. What part of this signals rebuild to the paying customers?
Even if there were some kind of rule (which there isn't), there's also a spectrum between "All aboard the tank-train! Dive, dive dive!" and "This team can't make the playoffs, we're going to focus on developing our young players for next year."
No there is explicitly a rule about circumventing the cap.Which still had no rule against it. It's also no different than the many other teams who signed long term deals and could still be punished for it despite not violating a rule.
The league has never punished anyone for it because since the Penguins in 1984 no one's really done it in a blatant way. They absolutely would go after someone for blatantly being non-competitive, especially since revenue sharing now exists.
None of your quotes are remotely close to real, BTW. He did talk in The Athletic about how he doesn't think this transition won't have to be a total tear it down and rebuild for years kind of thing, he thinks it'll be quick, but he absolutely didn't say any of the made up **** you seem to think he did.
Can't he just take notes from Dean Lombardi about what happened to Mike Richards? And it should be much easier for Kesler considering he lives in Detroit in the offseason.
No there is explicitly a rule about circumventing the cap.
Excerpt from 26.3:
No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement
All of those quotes are actually paraphrasings, and he's said all of them. I don't really care enough if you believe me to try to look them up. Most of them were around the time they asked about firing Carlyle during the 12 game losing streak, or just before Cogs was dealt.
I don't read anything from the Athletic, so if he did say something about "this transition" then that is something. He should tell these to the customers more directly though. He can't rely on pay sites to reach them.
No, because the Mike Richards joke is getting old and isn't serious. Robidas Island merely circumvents league rules and the league doesn't seem to interested in stopping it. It worked nicely for the Leafs.
Since he lives in Michigan in offseason & his last name is Germanic: Kesler Forrest, an American Black Forrest with castles, breweries, beerhalls serving authentic curry wurst & saurerbraten.This.
Robidas island, Lupul atoll, Hossa archipelago.
Next stop on the cap relief cruise: Kesler keys.
the holdup there is that he has to agree to want to end his career. I'm not sure I see that happening before next seasonI thought there was some report a while back that Kesler’s contract was insured. If so, a medically initiated retirement would be very financially beneficial.
the holdup there is that he has to agree to want to end his career. I'm not sure I see that happening before next season
Of course he has a say in the matter. If he wants to continue playing, there is nothing the Ducks can do about that as long as he is still being medically cleared by the doctors.Well, he might not really have a say in the matter. I wouldn't doubt if his hypothetical challenge would go as well as Lupul's last year.
I also could see it. Pride works both ways and I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't want to continue being a shell of himself. I remember when people used to rip Mark Messier for hanging on too long and he was still a pretty decent player, I don't think any athlete ever wants to be that guy.
It certainly makes it easier if Kesler buys in. And I know nobody wants an internal fight, but this is where Bob needs to step up and diplomatically force the issue. Bob needs to do his job, that’s why he makes the big bucks. If Kesler really wants to earn his money, let him intern for a front office job so he can still be connected to the team. He and Randy can share an office.the holdup there is that he has to agree to want to end his career. I'm not sure I see that happening before next season
You're partially correctKesler isn't the problem, his implementation is.
Of course he has a say in the matter. If he wants to continue playing, there is nothing the Ducks can do about that as long as he is still being medically cleared by the doctors.
They need to buy him out if that's the case