"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana
“Hello, NHL? This is Charles Wang calling.”
With a new NHL CBA about to be negotiated, I tend to agree with The Hockey News’ Mike Brophy when he said that this CBA will not be player vs. owners, but owners vs. owners. One owner set the stage and learned his lesson while others seem to be heading down a dangerous path that will strangle this industry in the long run.
These are just my opinions, as most of my blogs are simply my opinion, but it’s one that seems to be shared by many other hockey fans. We have seen what long term deals (LTDs) can do and we don’t like them. Nope. We don’t. We’re thinking five to seven years should be the maximum -- for a variety of reasons. None of them being the NHL league wide insurance program only covers players for a maximum of seven years of a contract. (Who knew?)
From A.J. Perez for Fox Sports
“The NHL has a league-wide insurance plan that covers the clubs in case a player suffers a long-term injury or is disabled. After a player misses 30 consecutive games for the same injury, a team can apply for insurance and be reimbursed 80 percent of that player’s salary …”
An interesting clause that both the Islanders and the Penguins may have tapped into for their seriously injured stars, Rick DiPietro and Sydney Crosby. However, after cashing in on something like that, it is possible that specific body parts are excluded for subsequent years. For DiPietro that may be multiple body parts. By now only his wrists are insurable and maybe his left big toe.
When the first of the LTDs was penned, it was a shock to the industry and it made the NY Islanders a laughing stock in the trades. But quickly other teams realized it was a way to not only lock up quality talent long term, but to make big pay-days fit below the salary cap system.
New Jersey Devils General Manager was so good at finding a loophole in the system that the NHL and the NHLPA had to work out an adjusted rule;
The Kovalchuk Rule.
Thanks to Adam Proteau for explaining it so eloquently in his latest mail bag on The Hockey News website.
“1. Players may still negotiate long-term deals that extend to the point a player turns 40 years old, but for salary cap calculation purposes, the contract will end the year the player turns 41 and his real salary at that point will stand up as his cap hit.
2. Any contract paying an NHLer an average of more than $5.75 million for the three highest-paid seasons of the deal will result in a minimum cap hit of $1 million for each season the player is between 36 and 39 years old.”
Confusing? Yes. You have to be a capologist or a sly General Manager to know the true potential of this legal language. And still they left loopholes you can jump through -- and they have.
Then you have what I would call the
Luongo Rule where both club and player sour on their situation, yet are strapped by the LTD they thought was a good idea at the time.
Vancouver signed Robert Luongo to a 12 year contract in 2010, however in 2012, at age 33, Roberto and the Canucks say it is time for him to move on. Where can he go with ten years remaining on his deal that brings him to age 43. (Please don’t say the Islanders… please don’t say the Islanders.)
This is the absurdity of these long term deals. Suppose Jonathan Quick becomes the second coming of Rick DiPietro? Suppose Sydney gets clocked in the head again? Suppose Zach Parise’s knee isn’t exactly 100%? Suppose the NHL starts to LOSE money, then what?
Suppose the insurance industry gets wise to your antics and you can't GET insurance on these players?
WAKE UP NHL!
As much as the fans may love certain players, we are fickle. We get bored! This is why Free Agency and Trade Deadline Day are so exciting for us. We get a new toy to play with, maybe even two!
You have done the league and your fans a great disservice by creating these long term deals that explore loopholes in the cap structure. You have saddled yourselves with huge salaries that will drag you down for years. You have also destroyed one of the best things about hockey -- the drive to compete.
Isn’t it human nature to sit back a little when you know you’re secure? How often have we seen brilliant play from NHLers who were in the last year of their contract? How hard will players really push if they know they have a guaranteed salary until they are 43? How will you pay for it? Or should I say, how will WE pay for it?
Stop! Just STOP IT RIGHT NOW! If LTDs were such a great idea, I suppose you wouldn’t be discussing an amnesty program to get out of them to be included in the forthcoming CBA!
Guaranteed contract lengths must be put on the table for discussion. Limits must be set. And the owners need to come to terms with each other before they destroy what is already a delicate business model.
New York Islanders Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»