Re: Ilya Kovalchuk on unconditional waivers for the purpose of terminating his contract
I'm really interested by how this this whole deal went down from a labour perspective, and if it could have ripple effects to other players on bad contracts. I'm honestly shocked the NHLPA allowed Kovalchuk and the Kings to terminate the contract in this manner.
Kovalchuk signs a big deal and immediately does not live up to the hype, happens often. Now the team is stuck with an old under-performing player on a bad contract. NHL contracts are, as we know, fully guaranteed so the Kings are paying out the cash and the cap-hit. Guaranteed player contracts, subject only to buyouts, is possibly the most valuable item players have in the CBA, relative to football where if you play poorly or get hurt you're cut and get very little of what you signed up for.
Anyways, the Kings decide that Kovy sucks and do not want to play him anymore so he gets healthy scratched, that is the Kings right, they keep scratching him, and let him know he will not play "for the foreseeable future" and make his working conditions uncomfortable (as uncomfortable as they can be for a guy getting paid millions to play a sport). Finally, after he gets his bonus payout he leaves the team (not sure exactly what he did, simply informed them he was leaving/would not report?) and that gives the Kings grounds to terminate the contract.
Perhaps Kovalchuk has enough money and he values being on a team who values him and actually playing in games over the money, perhaps he has too much pride to practice every day and never play. In that regard walking away is the right move for Kovalchuk, however this result is a terrible result for the NHLPA for a few reasons:
1. It is a back door way that allows the Kings to terminate the contract, yes their is a cap-hit but Kovy gives up $5mil in actual cash, he will not make that next season anywhere else. In employment law what the Kings did is referred to as "constructive dismissal" basically your employer makes your work life miserable by: changing your shifts, or job title, or responsibilities etc. all in an effort to get you to quit so the employer does not have to pay severance. The NHLPA does not want their to be a precedent for teams to be able to terminate players on "bad" contracts. Remember when Luongo said he would "tear up his contract" if he could? The NHLPA stepped in quickly behind the scenes to put a stop to that.
2. The result of a cap-hit but no cash payment is actually the worst possible outcome for the NHLPA. Not only does one of its members lose $5mil but the Kings are CBA barred from giving that same money to another player, its a double-whammy.
It may be too late for the NHLPA to do anything formal about the Kovalchuk situation, especially if he signs with a new team shortly. But I would not be surprised to see either a grievance filed to object to the Kings' actions, or at a minimum learn that behind the scenes the NHLPA has put the NHL on notice that they object to the treatment of Kovalchuk. If the NHLPA just allows the Kovalchuk situation to end it may give the Predators ideas for getting rid of Kyle Turris or the Flames and Lucic, or any other number of less that ideal contracts on the books.
12 team H-2-H 1 year league, daily roster changes, 3 goalie start minimum/week
2xC, 2xRW, 2xLW, 4xD, 3xUtil, 2xG, 5 Bench
G, A, P, PIM, PPP, SHP, GWG, SOG, Hits, W, SV%, GAA, SVs
C: C. Keller, C. Mittelstadt, B. Nelson, R. Strome,
LW: K. Connor, B. Tkachuk, J. Gaudreau, J. Marchessault, E. Rodrigues, A. Lafreniere
RW: K. Fiala, J. Bratt, T. Jeannot V. Arvidsson
D: R. Josi, J. Trouba, E. Gustafsson,
G: L. Thompson, F. Gustavsson, V. Vanecek
NO IR
Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by Dennis
Posting Permissions