This situation is beyond puzzling to me. The New Jersey Devils bent-over-backwards to make sure the Ilya Kovalchuk would be the face of the franchise for years to come. They paid a high price through trade (Oduya, Bergfors, Cormier, 1st and 2nd round picks), and they paid a high price in punishment for the contract they tried to sign him for (17 year, $102 Million), where the NHL fined the Devils $3 million and the loss of a 3rd round pick in 2011 and a 1st round pick in next year’s draft. This is not mentioning the contract they eventually did sign him for (15 years, $100 million).
On a player personnel side, since acquiring Kovalchuk the Devils haven’t been able to maneuver under the cap. Due to this, not only has the team not be able to improve around Kovalchuk, they have lost considerable pieces surrounding him, most notably Zach Parise. Parise was viewed as the centrepiece of the Devils for years to come until he was forced to test free agency due to the Devils cap restraints. It’s hard to say whether he would have stayed or not, but if other notable prospective unrestricted free agents show any pattern, it is that they usually re-sign.
One would think that the Devils would be just a “little” annoyed at the fact that the player they put all their faith in is now bailing on the team. However, the issues I see here are from three different points of view: The player’s, the team’s, and the NHL’s.
The player’s point of view is pretty simple and transparent. He does not want to play in the NHL (or North America anymore) and wants to go home. By retiring, his commitment to the Devils is done and in theory he will be free to do whatever he wants at home in Russia.
From the Devil’s point of view, even though Lou Lamoriello said that this was not the team’s decision, I wouldn’t be surprised if it were their idea. It’s no secret that the Devils have doing poorly on the business side of things. Since Jeffery Vanderbeek took over ownership of the team earlier this year, there have been numerous reports of the team’s financial troubles (including reports less than a month ago). Within the organization, they have this asset in Kovalchuk who isn’t producing like they thought he would on the ice, he isn’t putting butts in the seats like they thought he would, and they can’t sell or trade him due to his outlandish contract. In fact, Kovalchuk's 89 goals since joining the Devils cost $258,000 each. Not exactly a great business deal.
The next logical solution would be to use one of the compliance buyouts on Kovalchuk. However, while that solution gives them the cap space, they would still have pay a significant part of the $77 million left in his deal, which only makes their financial problems worse. So with the Devils knowing Kovalchuk’s situation, they both agreed that he should retire to cut the losses for the team and the player gets to go home and be free to do whatever.
So, this is win-win for everyone right? Wrong
The last perspective is from the NHL. This move can be viewed as a dangerous precedent going forward for any player trying to get out of their contract. By this theory, if a player doesn’t like the contract he signed in the NHL and knows he can go to the KHL, he can just say “That’s it! I retire”, which will let him out of his deal and off he goes. An example of this could be with Alexander Radulov. One of the main reasons he left for the KHL was because he didn’t like his rookie deal. Using this strategy, Radulov would have been able to say “I retire”, which would negate his current deal. Even if a player were to come back, their rights may be retained by the original team, but they would still likely have to negotiate a new contract… which would be a loophole in favour of the player. This last part was more of an assumption of my part than fact. After going through the CBA, they did not touch on the subject of a player retiring and coming back. However, the point to be made is the NHL needs to make a “stink” about Kovalchuk playing in the KHL because even though it seems the team and player seem ok with the decision, it could be the precedent that could affect many other players in the future.
Anyway, that’s my two cents on the matter. I’m sure Roger Mussa, Todd Cordell, or Sam Woo will have more in the coming days in greater detail.
In any case, you people can email me at
[email protected] or follow me on twitter
@Kirshenblatt .
Join the Discussion:
»