Comments on: KHL president argues new CBA opens door to terminate contracts

By: ranndino

ranndino — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 03:27:10 +0000

@bcisleman Dude, Visnovsky plays for Slovan Bratislava. Bratislava is the capital of Slovakia. So he’s playing at home. Not sure you know, but the KHL is not just made up of Russian teams anymore. They’re expanding to try and become kind of like the NHL of Europe.

By: thecheeman

thecheeman — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:45:05 +0000

Kovy had 7 points in 4 games in the Flyers series. He only missed one game. LOL FLYERS FANS.

Brodeur didn’t even play well AT ALL until about the last third of the regular season last year. He was notably subpar before that, so while he picked it up big time late he hardly carries the team all year. Hedberg was the better goalie for the Devils in the first half of the season and it wasn’t even close.

By: thecheeman

thecheeman — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:39:10 +0000

the numbers might be huge, but would the track record you’re referring to be his track record of 6 consecutive 40+ goal seasons, including two 50 goal seasons, while he was still in his absolute prime?

Amazing comment there pal.

By: thecheeman

thecheeman — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:36:21 +0000

Dude you might remember two years ago after the Devils fired MacLean they ripped off like 20 straight wins under Lemaire without Parise who missed that entire season. It hurts a lot but franchises have endured losing better players than Zach.

By: thecheeman

thecheeman — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:34:36 +0000

Oh please. Sorry the Devils-Panthers 7 game OT series wasn’t emotional enough for you Flyers fans to approve of. I remember the Flyers were so emotionally drained after that series they took the stage at a Nickelback concert like a bunch of toolbags and took a big bow like they really accomplished anything beyond winning one series.

By: wingsdjy

wingsdjy — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:26:35 +0000

@woodstakes
I think the union ratifying the contract would make your argument void. Visnovsky is part of the union, so he has to follow whatever they agree regardless of his personal feelings. He could pull a Tim Thomas and just not play hockey.

By: icrew29

icrew29 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:22:42 +0000

If any player doesn’t want to play in the NHL, so be it. If you force him to play he will react just like anyone forced to do anything. Just explain that he will not be welcome in the NHL if he stays in the KHL.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:29:05 +0000

*then

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:28:19 +0000

They aren’t opinions, people are giving out wrong information and that acting as if it has to be correct.

Sometimes it’s better to listen, (or read).

By: lordstanley65

lordstanley65 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 06:55:34 +0000

So folks can’t form their own opinions without a law degree? Was that part of the new CBA?

By: woodstakes

woodstakes — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 06:31:40 +0000

The quotation marks are there as sarcastic shot at the idea’s behind them.. Like the “Make Whole” idea which is a stupid way of saying “Yes, you will get paid… we just don’t know when.” As for trying to explain contract law… all I was trying to do is describe how I understand what has been leaked out so far. In no way am I trying to say that I “know” (like what I did there) anything more than anyone else. It was simply a statement that if my understanding was wrong that someone would correct me so that I may understand it better. Also, I didn’t know that the grammar police come to chat sites to critique others. Perhaps you could have stated something that was of some intellectual help to the dialogue we were discussing. You know, maybe say something that explains what part it is I got wrong and what the correct statement would be. You know, try contributing instead of being a grammatical tool!

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 06:22:15 +0000

Please everyone, if you have no background in law, do not write opinions as if you do.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 06:19:52 +0000

Why would Russia enforce a US judgment against their own citizen?

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 06:18:00 +0000

Woodstakes, this was the worst attempt at trying to explain contract law. It’s great that you know a few key words but you have no idea what you’re talking about.

You should also learn when it’s appropriate to use quotation marks around words.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 06:05:56 +0000

They have the potential to make more money over there because the owner’s are billionaires who own their teams for bragging rights not to offset gains on their taxes.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 06:03:42 +0000

And just what type of legal action do you think you can get from a Russian playing in Russia?

By: badintent

badintent — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 05:58:18 +0000

@bcisleman
That’s the point ! playing for the Isle is like playing in a Siberian Gulang. It’s called Bed-Sty(rythems with pigsty) My friend was working security for the Nets, quit, said the area was too dangerous even for him.

By: woodstakes

woodstakes — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 05:44:36 +0000

Idk stakex but to me it seems that as soon as that “legally binding NHL contract” pays him anything less than what it states on the document I would think it could be viewed as breached and not on his part. Now, I know there is the “Make Whole” thing and that is in place to ensure the players get paid… but it does not mean he will get paid this year for this years salary. It just means somewhere along the lines he will get his money. So as soon as that salary is not paid to him and he doesn’t get it back in escrow payment due to the league and players share both reaching 50/50 then the “Make Whole” kicks in.. at least that’s my understanding. So if a contract says you get paid $1M for this year and he gets paid $800k then technically that contract has been breached. Now with CBA laws that my be different, however I think if it went to court it could probably be proven if one was willing to spend the funds to fight it… and KHL owners have the funds.

Bottom line is the NHL did this to themselves by trying to get out from under these contracts already (trying to ‘legally’ breach the contracts). By doing so they set a precedent that NHL contracts are apparently not all that “legally binding”. At least they weren’t when it was in favor for the league side of the coin. I guess all i’m saying is they started down that slippery slope and now here’s the consequence for trying to bully the NHLPA on these contracts.

By: orangeandblack67

orangeandblack67 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 05:16:08 +0000

Stak you actually made me chuckle reading your goalie comment but truth is truth; Brodure can’t carry the devils forever.

By: lordstanley65

lordstanley65 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 04:49:53 +0000

Yah, me too…it’s like whistling while passing a graveyard.

By: lordstanley65

lordstanley65 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 04:44:30 +0000

Excellent idea! Imagine the stakes…no way I’d miss that!

By: stakex

stakex — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 04:38:30 +0000

Its over a guy who doesn’t want to honor a legally binding NHL contract.

By: stakex

stakex — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 04:35:15 +0000

Hearing a Flyers fan trash talk another teams goalie always makes me laugh.

By: stakex

stakex — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 04:30:53 +0000

Spoken like someone who has no idea what the hell hes talking about, and doesn’t know a thing about business.

The contracts the players sign are tied to the CBA. If one CBA expires, and a new one is signed, they just carry over to the new one and all new CBA rules are applied to that contract. Thats how it works, and the players know that. A couple other points:

1. Max contract length doesn’t mean a thing to current deals. So even though thats a big change, it can only impact a player AFTER their current deal expires.

2. The amount of the contracts isn’t changing. If a player is suppose to make $8 million next year, thats what they will be paid by the team. Now some of that money goes into escrow, and all that changes now is how much is taken back from the escrow account. Its also worth pointing out this is where the “make whole” money comes in.

3. Cap limit has no impact on a current deal, other then teams being stuck with contracts that are higher then they should be to fit the current cap.

4. Most of the terms on the contract won’t change, and the ones that do are parts of the contract that are tied to the CBA. So its not the contract that changes, but rather the CBA its tied to.

——————————————————-

Now the players know all this can/probably would happen when they signed their current deals. Theres no suprise here, and theres nothing funky about it… its just how the business works. The only comical thing here is just how bad you understand whats going on.

By: dkphilly1122

dkphilly1122 — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 04:30:40 +0000

Will ANYONE miss Kovi?? One of the most overrated, over paid waste of roster spots. He didn’t do much of anything against the Flyers either Marty…..remember he had an “injury”, at least that was his excuse to miss the first few games. Flyers will school them this year without there best player in Parise. Marty Brodeur had a great year last year but he isn’t getting any younger. He is bound to start showing signs of age and I believe it will be this year. Like Orange said up further, people I know who are Devil fans hate Kovi and his horrible contract.

By: mountainmantride

mountainmantride — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 03:59:55 +0000

Let me get this straight. Owners lockout the players. Owners want to “redo” players contracts…you know stuff like length of the deal, amount of contract, cap limits, terms of contract, etc., etc. BUT the contracts are still valid. Huh? The details of the contracts are significantly changed but the players are obligated to them anyhow. The comedy routine aka the NHL continues. I used to really like Comedy Central, I’m now turning to PHT for my comedy fix.

By: macjacmccoy

macjacmccoy — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 03:59:44 +0000

yea im sure they didnt know this was a possibility.

By: macjacmccoy

macjacmccoy — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 03:57:38 +0000

I cant believe anyone would compare NHL contracts to NFL contracts. They arent even close to the same thing. NFL contracts arent guaranteed meaning they all have out clauses. And what are you talking about that the NHL should have some out clause so they dont have to pay them their full amount of money if they jump ship? Of course they have an out clause. IF you dont play for the NHL team you signed with you dont get paid anything. Simple as that. How can someone be a sports fan and not know that.

By: macjacmccoy

macjacmccoy — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 03:51:38 +0000

Giroux with the 2 broken wrists? Big accomplishment.

By: govtminion

govtminion — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 03:44:37 +0000

The only people who didn’t see this coming were the NHL owners and Bettman.