smithers joe Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 i can't understand how, if the league approves these signings, that they can come back and penalize the team for making them... they should just close the loop hole and not let them happen again...if anyone is penalized, it should be the league for signing off on these contracts in the first place...if something is accepted one year but not the next, how can you penalize a team for doing what was accepted before the rule change?..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tre Mac Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Called it. This was a back door deal between Kovie Bettman and the new ownership group. He'll be a devil again next year. What a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 You're trusting capgeek? OK, the Luongo rule or cap recapture penalty applies directly to RETIREMENT contracts..... every contract is subject to a recapture penalty if a player juts retires from the league though Here read up. http://www.wingingit...ans-for-the-red http://spectorshocke...recapture-rule/ http://www.vancouver...2079/story.html http://sports.yahoo....17517--nhl.html From the forum itself http://forum.canucks...he-luongo-rule/ capgeeks calculator http://www.capgeek.c...ure-calculator/ And finally cap geeks breakdown of it http://www.capgeek.com/faq/new-cba So by naming X amount of players just because you saw them on a screen detracts from any credibility you might have in this debate. Quick wouldn't ever suffer from that as retirement contracts and contract length has been nullified by the new CBA I don't know what your point is here. Any deal of a certain length that has back diving salary is subject to recapture rules. Deals that are shorter, have consistent salary or are back loaded aren't subject to recapture rules. Hossa and Zetterberg (along with Franzen) were the original back diving contracts and will be subject to cap recapture based on when those players retire while those contracts are still in effect. If a player is young enough to play out his contract, then fair enough, but the players he listed are all pretty much guaranteed cap recapture penalties for the teams they play for. They certainly all qualify under the rules of cap recapture. The NHL isn't just punishing us because it got nicknamed the Luongo Rule. But maybe lets keep this all in the thread that was posted first: Leage Reverses Part of Penalty Against Devils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoman13 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 There is a difference between luongo and kovalchuck. The Devils were penalized for the contract itself, the canucks were not. The Devils were hurt retroactively by the cba, as were the canucks and many other teams. Not saying this is right or wrong (although I dont have much against it), but the two situations are different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thema Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 So when Bobby Lou retires early I can expect the same sort of discounts for the nucks Lou is going to play till he is at least 45 now that he's back home in FLA so no worries. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I thought the penalty was a bit steep in the first place, considering there were no specific rules forbidding it, and it was only a slightly more aggressive version of what other teams were doing. And then I couldn't understand why they didn't forfeit the 29th pick a couple of years back. Guess they figured they could have it overturned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 On top of that, they barely received any actual benefit from it. The big money years didn't kick in before he "retired". Kovalchuk's actual salary was pretty close to his cap hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Golly I wish the Canucks were an entitled franchise. They'd have one or two cups by now if that were the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bookie Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I read this when I was half awake and thought it had to do with his retirement, ie. they would let him back into the league on a new contract quicker. But the penalties for the original contract ... meh, not such a big deal. I tend to agree with D-Money up above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 So when Bobby Lou retires early I can expect the same sort of discounts for the nucks my thoughts exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Those names are taken directly from capgeek so I'm not really sure what your point is? I think retroactively changing rules is bull, but you guys act like the Canucks are the only team affected by it. The league should not of approved Hossa's contract or let them trade Huet to europe but they did and then when Vancouver signed Lu to a long term deal they suddenly decided to investigate and of all the teams who have players signed long term Lu is the most likely to retire early. The only other player i would say could retire early as well is Richards. I went through some of the names you listed above and some of those players are not even signed to long term cap circumventing contracts. Like the staals? None of them are signed to back diving contracts same with Nash and those are only the first 2 I checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 The league should not of approved Hossa's contract or let them trade Huet to europe but they did and then when Vancouver signed Lu to a long term deal they suddenly decided to investigate and of all the teams who have players signed long term Lu is the most likely to retire early. The only other player i would say could retire early as well is Richards. I went through some of the names you listed above and some of those players are not even signed to long term cap circumventing contracts. Like the staals? None of them are signed to back diving contracts same with Nash and those are only the first 2 I checked. Check this link: http://capgeek.com/recapture-calculator/ Look at the list of names. They've compiled a list of players that fit the criteria of length for cap recapture. The deals you mention don't fit the other criteria because they either have even salary every year or more salary in the final years, but that's what he was looking at I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 So when Bobby Lou retires early I can expect the same sort of discounts for the nucks Florida will always be a cap floor team so I'm not all that worried. Doubt they do us a favour and keep him on LTIR like Pronger should he decide to call it quits early though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Florida will always be a cap floor team so I'm not all that worried. Doubt they do us a favour and keep him on LTIR like Pronger should he decide to call it quits early though. If Pronger retires he doesnt get paid if he goes on LTIR he gets paid from insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Then there's the fact that he's actually injured. Don't let that get in the way of your plans though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Emerick Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Justice is served, Thank you Josh Harris. Not sure what Dreger meant because there is still a recapture penalty of 250k on the rest of Parisechuk's deal. I can finally appreciate Stefan Matteau now instead of wondering if it was the right decision to draft him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YEGCanuck Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Sweet Lou and Bettman, what a pair. The NHL is totally misguided if they think this type of bush league move lends itself to credibility of the league. The moremoves like this can only damage the NHL's reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiggs50 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 God forbid of course but say Luongo gets hurt long term with 1-3 or how many ever years left on his contract. ie concussion etc etc... So if Florida puts him on ltir and he never plays, do we still get hit with the salary cap recapture?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 They dropped the ball here. There could have been a Michael Fay-type punishment, as in a publc caning. Bettman givin' leapin' LL a few good whacks with a bamboo staff, would've ensured we got a lid on this stewin'stench. You can't reverse a proper canin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pouria Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 @DarrenDreger: NHL will award Devils with the 30th pick in the Draft instead of the 1st round pick as usually determined. Also forgiving $1.5 mil of fine. I guess it's a good thing for the Devils that they waited to give up the pick. NHL, making up rules as they go. We got screwed by the NHL and that is why Luongo was traded. Their stupid CBA that shouldn't have been allowed to affect contracts that were previously signed. Seriously, is there any sports league that is as backward as the NHL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.