CapitalsCupReality
It’s Go Time!!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 64,867
- 19,738
Do keep in mind the NHL issued a statement that these types of contracts were against the rules, and eventually did punish the Devils for a back-diving deal (though they later softened the punishment after Kovalchuk's "retirement"). The league's enforcement is haphazard (even if the previous CBA lacked proper mechanisms), and taking on a deal of this nature does incur risk. Heck, Chicago could still be screwed in the future if they are burdened by the recapture that was instituted well after they signed Hossa. Though, obviously, 2-3 cups is worth that pain down the road.
Kovalchuk's 17 year deal was signed at age 27, and was the longest in league history. There really wasn't an avenue to sign Backstrom or Ovechkin to even longer deals at an even younger age without enormous risk. If the Caps were to take advantage, it would have had to a Hossa-like addition via UFA.
I'm too lazy to dig through the CBA to see what mandates are required to LTIR a player (but keep mind how we had Orlov on LTIR long after he played his conditioning games in Hershey, so I don't think it's very stringent). All of those guys are indeed injured, but it's to the point where it's not expected they return at any point. This is most pressing in the case of Pronger, who has actually held two jobs in his post-player career (scout with Flyers and now in the NHL's DoPS) and has a 35+ contract. If Pronger retired, his 35+ contract would impact the Flyers' salary cap. Since he's on LTIR, it effectively doesn't (minus elimination of banking cap space and off-season limits). Even more to the point, the NHL has acknowledged he's no longer an active player by hiring him to the DoPS, which also means he's simultaneously under contract with the Philadelphia Flyers and the league itself (something that is expressively prohibited by the CBA). Neither the NHL nor the NHLPA are going to raise a stink about Pronger getting paid by two sources here, so there will be no fallout. As with the Kovalchuk deal, this is another example of the NHL enforcing its rules when it wants to and turning a blind eye when it doesn't.
Most players' contracts are insured (though Horton's was not), so them retiring does not cost the player any money.
Can you point me to that section of the CBA? I'd like to read how it's worded.