Thomas Drance’s rant on the Luongo recapture penalty: “One of the worst rules in the history of professional sports”

[EP40.]

 

Fully agree with what he says.

 

Penalizing a team for legally complying & completing a league approved contract more than a decade after the fact. 

 

The Canucks are at a handicap and feeling it’s effects now (ultimately didn’t allow us to sign Boeser long term) and for future seasons. All because Lu took the honourable approach in retiring and not sitting on LTIR.

 

...I’m appalled that the ruling was upheld in this case, a pre-existing contract retroactive to the rule implementation. How the Canucks weren’t able to defend this and get it overturned is beyond me. Literally everyone in hockey (analysts, commentators, etc) agree that the rule is bogus for contracts signed beforehand and somehow it still sticks.

 

 

 

you can bet your ass it won’t be the case for contracts such as Weber’s. 100% if he calls it quits early the Predators and him will work hand-in-hand to ensure he’s shelfed on LTIR. As many former players have already done. But the Canucks are tagged for Lu. 

 

NHL is gonna NHL ...

[IBatch]

23 minutes ago, EP40. said:

 

Fully agree with what he says.

 

Penalizing a team for legally complying & completing a league approved contract more than a decade after the fact. 

 

The Canucks are at a handicap and feeling it’s effects now (ultimately didn’t allow us to sign Boeser long term) and for future seasons. All because Lu took the honourable approach in retiring and not sitting on LTIR.

 

...I’m appalled that the ruling was upheld in this case, a pre-existing contract retroactive to the rule implementation. How the Canucks weren’t able to defend this and get it overturned is beyond me. Literally everyone in hockey (analysts, commentators, etc) agree that the rule is bogus for contracts signed beforehand and somehow it still sticks.

 

 

 

you can bet your ass it won’t be the case for contracts such as Weber’s. 100% if he calls it quits early the Predators and him will work hand-in-hand to ensure he’s shelfed on LTIR. As many former players have already done. But the Canucks are tagged for Lu. 

 

NHL is gonna NHL ...

Given almost all other teams have got away with it - and that the length of contracts were dealt with permanently after the fact, it is a little surprising the league upheld it.   Unless Weber is injured (in which case it’s a non-issue) I’m sure he has at least four more years left in him .... which would leave a couple left.   He’s a stand up guy - doubt he would be “injured” just to for the heck of the cap ...  wouldn’t be surprised if he plays the entire thing out either. 
 

Edit:  Good listen though - thanks for posting 

Edited July 8, 2020 by IBatch

[sonoman]

It was a bogus move by Buttman at the time and it’s still bogus to make it retroactive.  Especially after it was League Approved. 

[King Heffy]

He's not wrong.  Yet another example of corruption in the NHL headed by a career criminal.  Bettman belongs in prison.

[Toews]

35 minutes ago, EP40. said:

The Canucks are at a handicap and feeling it’s effects now (ultimately didn’t allow us to sign Boeser long term) and for future seasons. All because Lu took the honourable approach in retiring and not sitting on LTIR.

As it is my understanding Luongo retired because he was getting a front office job with the Panthers. Had he gone on LTIR he would have cost the Panthers money, had he gone on LTIR on the Canucks payroll then he was ineligible to take a job with the Panthers. So he chose the route he did out of self-serving reasons not due to some "honourable approach". On one hand I accept that he did not owe us anything yet I can't help but feel annoyed. I think he is a likeable person but I am no longer a fan anymore because I see him as a Florida Man now and a Panther for life. I sincerely hope the Panthers continue to play in half-empty stadiums wallowing in irrelevance. 

 

As an aside, Chris Pronger took a job with the DOPS while being employed by the Coyotes, this was considered permissible by the league.

19 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Given almost all other teams have got away with it - and that the length of contracts were dealt with permanently after the fact, it is a little surprising the league upheld it.   Unless Weber is injured (in which case it’s a non-issue) I’m sure he has at least four more years left in him .... which would leave a couple left.   He’s a stand up guy - doubt he would be “injured” just to for the heck of the cap ...  wouldn’t be surprised if he plays the entire thing out either. 
 

Edit:  Good listen though - thanks for posting 

We shall see but my guess is Weber will take the money to sit at home like 99% of the guys that go on LTIR. They get to keep collecting the last of the pay cheques while helping to avoid the recapture, its a win-win both ways. 

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, EP40. said:

How the Canucks weren’t able to defend this and get it overturned is beyond me.

The Canuck organization/owner F.A. voted in favour of the CBA, that implemented the retro active rule. So it is kind of silly to protest over something they voted in favour of.

 

But it is a dumb rule.

[IBatch]

30 minutes ago, Toews said:

As it is my understanding Luongo retired because he was getting a front office job with the Panthers. Had he gone on LTIR he would have cost the Panthers money, had he gone on LTIR on the Canucks payroll then he was ineligible to take a job with the Panthers. So he chose the route he did out of self-serving reasons not due to some "honourable approach". On one hand I accept that he did not owe us anything yet I can't help but feel annoyed. I think he is a likeable person but I am no longer a fan anymore because I see him as a Florida Man now and a Panther for life. I sincerely hope the Panthers continue to play in half-empty stadiums wallowing in irrelevance. 

 

As an aside, Chris Pronger took a job with the DOPS while being employed by the Coyotes, this was considered permissible by the league.

We shall see but my guess is Weber will take the money to sit at home like 99% of the guys that go on LTIR. They get to keep collecting the last of the pay cheques while helping to avoid the recapture, its a win-win both ways. 

I don’t know about that - listening to the broadcast and reading what I have Luongo would have kept going if his body could make it ... he doesn’t owe us or Florida anything - that he choose to stay in Miami and rejoined as a special advisor 6-8 months after retirement is mute.     Doesn’t blemish anything he did while here - if we want to blame someone then MG and Bettman would be where to direct that.    The only thing I didn’t like about this was the whining I heard about how “untradable” his contract was...not really either- TO had a good offer, and heck we got Markstrom from the deal...no complaints there. 

[Toews]

28 minutes ago, IBatch said:

I don’t know about that - listening to the broadcast and reading what I have Luongo would have kept going if his body could make it ... he doesn’t owe us or Florida anything - that he choose to stay in Miami and rejoined as a special advisor 6-8 months after retirement is mute.

I don't consider Luongo's actions "honourable" as the OP describes it. I don't think he is necessarily a selfish person either, but what he did to me can only be described as self-serving. There is nothing imho in this action by Luongo for me to "honour" as a Canucks fan, when it directly hurts the Canucks ability to compete in the coming years.

Quote

Doesn’t blemish anything he did while here - if we want to blame someone then MG and Bettman would be where to direct that.

I agree that it doesn't blemish his achievements here. Just like Kesler choosing to go out the way he did doesn't diminish what he did for us. I just disagree with you that he doesn't deserve blame for this. 

 

My list of blame (in no particular order) is a lot longer than yours. Luongo (for taking the job), the Panthers (for offering the job), Aquilini (for not spending his millions on a compliance buyout), Tortorella (for pissing off Luongo by not starting him in the outdoor game), MG (for not foreseeing the disaster that was offering a goalie that term), Aquilini again (From what I read he was the driving force behind that contract). 

 

The league, Bettman and the CBA negotiations were external factors that were outside of the Canucks control. They set the rules that everybody has to agree to and live by, so its not like the Canucks were going to be only team affected by the new rules. I am more focused on the actions of the Canucks because that part was still under our purview.

Quote

The only thing I didn’t like about this was the whining I heard about how “untradable” his contract was...not really either- TO had a good offer, and heck we got Markstrom from the deal...no complaints there. 

We did have to retain money in order to trade him because no one was willing to accept that contract at its full cap hit. Both Nonis and Talon wanted retention, so I can see where the "untradable" part came from, Luongo himself admitted his contract "sucks". Wasn't an ideal situation but like you said we did get Markstrom out of it, unfortunately it now hinders our ability to re-sign him.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Toews

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, EP40. said:

 

Fully agree with what he says.

 

Penalizing a team for legally complying & completing a league approved contract more than a decade after the fact. 

 

The Canucks are at a handicap and feeling it’s effects now (ultimately didn’t allow us to sign Boeser long term) and for future seasons. All because Lu took the honourable approach in retiring and not sitting on LTIR.

 

...I’m appalled that the ruling was upheld in this case, a pre-existing contract retroactive to the rule implementation. How the Canucks weren’t able to defend this and get it overturned is beyond me. Literally everyone in hockey (analysts, commentators, etc) agree that the rule is bogus for contracts signed beforehand and somehow it still sticks.

 

 

 

you can bet your ass it won’t be the case for contracts such as Weber’s. 100% if he calls it quits early the Predators and him will work hand-in-hand to ensure he’s shelfed on LTIR. As many former players have already done. But the Canucks are tagged for Lu. 

 

NHL is gonna NHL ...

I doubt Montreal goes along with that notion. They'd be on the hook for Weber's salary and it counts against their cap if he's on LTR. Unless Nashville trades to get him back. Even then the league can send the player to an independent doctor to confirm he can't play.

 

Btw, it was the owners that voted that clause into the CBA. I pretty much agree with the clause as those contracts were obvious cap circumvention. Those contracts should never have been allowed in the first place.

[flat land fish]

It’s a ridiculous rule and the proposed amendments are equally stupid.

 

there were a lot of backdiving contracts and my long term bet is when more start entering recapture they turf the recapture completely.  

 

Drance mskes a good point in that it is bad it is bad for players as a whole as the potential pool of money league wide will go down the more recapture hits out there.

[JeremyCuddles]

I said before Lu even retired it was beyond stupid to punish a team for a contract signed before the new rule against that contract existed. NHL allowed the contract. You tell someone they can do something then punish them for doing that thing looks very bootleg. The worst part is the management crew that drew up that contract isn't even being punished. Benning is being punished for it. He didn't sign the contract punishing him for it is so stupid. I wish Vancouver would do more to fight it. 

[khay]

54 minutes ago, Toews said:

I don't consider Luongo's actions "honourable" as the OP describes it. I don't think he is necessarily a selfish person either, but what he did to me can only be described as self-serving. There is nothing imho in this action by Luongo for me to "honour" as a Canucks fan, when it directly hurts the Canucks ability to compete in the coming years.

I agree that it doesn't blemish his achievements here. Just like Kesler choosing to go out the way he did doesn't diminish what he did for us. I just disagree with you that he doesn't deserve blame for this. 

 

My list of blame (in no particular order) is a lot longer than yours. Luongo (for taking the job), the Panthers (for offering the job), Aquilini (for not spending his millions on a compliance buyout), Tortorella (for pissing off Luongo by not starting him in the outdoor game), MG (for not foreseeing the disaster that was offering a goalie that term), Aquilini again (From what I read he was the driving force behind that contract). 

 

The league, Bettman and the CBA negotiations were external factors that were outside of the Canucks control. They set the rules that everybody has to agree to and live by, so its not like the Canucks were going to be only team affected by the new rules. I am more focused on the actions of the Canucks because that part was still under our purview.

We did have to retain money in order to trade him because no one was willing to accept that contract at its full cap hit. Both Nonis and Talon wanted retention, so I can see where the "untradable" part came from, Luongo himself admitted his contract "sucks". Wasn't an ideal situation but like you said we did get Markstrom out of it, unfortunately it now hinders our ability to re-sign him.

IMO, we gotta take MG out from the blame list. That contract was legit under the CBA at the time. He was just doing his best to fit as many talented players under the cap.

 

 

[qwijibo]

3 hours ago, EP40. said:

 

Fully agree with what he says.

 

Penalizing a team for legally complying & completing a league approved contract more than a decade after the fact. 

 

The Canucks are at a handicap and feeling it’s effects now (ultimately didn’t allow us to sign Boeser long term) and for future seasons. All because Lu took the honourable approach in retiring and not sitting on LTIR.

 

...I’m appalled that the ruling was upheld in this case, a pre-existing contract retroactive to the rule implementation. How the Canucks weren’t able to defend this and get it overturned is beyond me. Literally everyone in hockey (analysts, commentators, etc) agree that the rule is bogus for contracts signed beforehand and somehow it still sticks.

 

 

 

you can bet your ass it won’t be the case for contracts such as Weber’s. 100% if he calls it quits early the Predators and him will work hand-in-hand to ensure he’s shelfed on LTIR. As many former players have already done. But the Canucks are tagged for Lu. 

 

NHL is gonna NHL ...

They have amended the rule in the new CBA.  Now the penalty in any given year can’t exceed the players AAV.  So if Weber were to retire in the final year Nashville will still have a $24m penalty but now it’ll be spread  over 3+ seasons.  I think that’s a reasonable adjustment. 

[qwijibo]

41 minutes ago, flat land fish said:

It’s a ridiculous rule and the proposed amendments are equally stupid.

 

there were a lot of backdiving contracts and my long term bet is when more start entering recapture they turf the recapture completely.  

 

Drance mskes a good point in that it is bad it is bad for players as a whole as the potential pool of money league wide will go down the more recapture hits out there.

How is the amendment stupid?  It doesn’t reduce the penalty. It just makes it so it’s far less potentially devastating. 

[King Heffy]

8 minutes ago, khay said:

IMO, we gotta take MG out from the blame list. That contract was legit under the CBA at the time. He was just doing his best to fit as many talented players under the cap.

 

 

He still should have pushed harder with FA to do the only sensible thing and do a compliance buyout.

[qwijibo]

10 minutes ago, khay said:

IMO, we gotta take MG out from the blame list. That contract was legit under the CBA at the time. He was just doing his best to fit as many talented players under the cap.

 

 

Teams were warned repeatedly not to circumvent the cap.  The league recognized the loophole in the wording of the CBA but had to wait until the new CBA kicked in the fix it.  That’s why the contract was approved. Make no mistake, The GM’s knew they were playing with fire.  There’s a reason only a handful of GM’s chose to risk it. They were looking for a competitive advantage in a cup run. They all knew there would be consequences (although they didn’t know what) 

[Gurn]

6 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

He still should have pushed harder with FA to do the only sensible thing and do a compliance buyout.

Wait, you were there when F.A. and Gillis talked about this?

Wow, who are you?

 

Owner's money, owner's decision.

[King Heffy]

7 minutes ago, gurn said:

Wait, you were there when F.A. and Gillis talked about this?

Wow, who are you?

 

Owner's money, owner's decision.

And GM's decision not to push back more or resign instead of causing permanent damage to the franchise.  Gillis either had no brain or no balls based on that idiotic trade.  Markstrom or not, anyone who wasn't a total idiot realized a buyout was the only solution that wouldn't cripple the team's cap situation in the future.  Gillis's lack of willingness to do the right thing for the franchise is likely a big part of the reason no owner with any sense would let him anywhere near their team.

Edited July 8, 2020 by King Heffy

[Rick Blight]

3 hours ago, EP40. said:

 

Fully agree with what he says.

 

Penalizing a team for legally complying & completing a league approved contract more than a decade after the fact. 

 

The Canucks are at a handicap and feeling it’s effects now (ultimately didn’t allow us to sign Boeser long term) and for future seasons. All because Lu took the honourable approach in retiring and not sitting on LTIR.

 

...I’m appalled that the ruling was upheld in this case, a pre-existing contract retroactive to the rule implementation. How the Canucks weren’t able to defend this and get it overturned is beyond me. Literally everyone in hockey (analysts, commentators, etc) agree that the rule is bogus for contracts signed beforehand and somehow it still sticks.

 

 

 

you can bet your ass it won’t be the case for contracts such as Weber’s. 100% if he calls it quits early the Predators and him will work hand-in-hand to ensure he’s shelfed on LTIR. As many former players have already done. But the Canucks are tagged for Lu. 

 

NHL is gonna NHL ...

Looks like the league has already taken care of that.

 

The biggest winner (if you can even call it that) out of this new change may be the Nashville Predators, who were in danger of a potential ~$24.6MM cap charge if Shea Weber had retired just before the 2025-26 season. That number will now not eclipse the $7.86MM cap hit he carries, though that means it would be spread out over several years as the entire penalty must still be paid eventually.

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2020/07/nhl-adjusts-recapture-penalties.html

 

[Provost]

Just now, qwijibo said:

Teams were warned repeatedly not to circumvent the cap.  The league recognized the loophole in the wording of the CBA but had to wait until the new CBA kicked in the fix it.  That’s why the contract was approved. Make no mistake, The GM’s knew they were playing with fire.  There’s a reason only a handful of GM’s chose to risk it. They were looking for a competitive advantage in a cup run. They all knew there would be consequences (although they didn’t know what) 

Looks like someone has been listening to the GM who comes onto SN650 who literally lobbied and made the rule for his own benefit...

The league could have rejected the contracts under their catch all "cap circumvention" powers or negotiated a MOU appendix to the CBA.  They didn't choose to do that and instead approved the contracts.  They then retroactively decided to make a rule with an arbitrary length cut off to penalize teams for contracts the league approved at the time.

They are welcome to change the rules, but doing it retroactively is unheard of.

Add in the fact that every other team who player who actually retired were allowed to wrangle out of the penalty using obvious improper ploys.  Of any of the contracts, Luongo lived up to the terms of the contract as best as he could.  He would have failed his medical, but chose to retire to help out the Panthers and then took a job with the team that pays him his money anyways.  Any fair minded objective person would see it as not cap circumvention requiring a penalty imposed.  You know that if it was a favoured franchise they would just not have the penalty.

Now they have modified the rules yet again, making the recapture less onerous on "some" teams... but not us.  If they screwed up the rule, just cancel it.