Should the NHL be upset with the structure of Brad Richards’ new contract?

5 Comments

The New Jersey Devils signed Ilya Kovalchuk to two contracts last summer. The first (rejected) one included a few final seasons with salaries that ran in such stark contrast to the first, big-money campaigns that the NHL took a stand.

After permitting numerous contracts that included final years with such small salaries that one can only assume that the two sides had “wink, wink” retirement agreements, the league would not validate the first version of Kovalchuk’s ridiculous deal. The NHL eventually ratified an amended version of Kovalchuk’s contract, but it came at a price. The Devils were fined $3 million for their shenanigans, lost their 2011 third round pick and must give up a first round pick in one of the next three years (they could have given that up this year, but they wisely chose not to and ended up landing defenseman of the future Adam Larsson).

In a way, the NHL “made an example” of the Devils, but it seemed a lot like grade school moments in which the most rambunctious child gets all the peddling even though he’s far from the only person who misbehaves. If the league is truly upset with those types of deals, they cannot be very happy with the structure of Brad Richards’ boffo deal with the New York Rangers.

With the help of Gord Miller’s report, here is the year-by-year structure of yet another cap-circumventing contract.

2011-12 season: $12 million ($10 million signing bonus, $2 million salary)
2012-13 season: $12 million ($8 million signing bonus, $4 million salary)
2013-14 salary: $9 million
2014-15 salary: $8.5 million
2015-16 salary: $8.5 million
2016-17 salary: $7 million
2017-18 salary: $1 million
2018-19 salary: $1 million
2019-20 salary: $1 million

Here is how Ilya Kovalchuk’s rejected contract would have looked.

2010-11: $6 million
2011-12: $6 million
2012-13: $11.5 million
2013-14: $11.5 million
2014-15: $11.5 million
2015-16: $11.5 million
2016-17: $11.5 million
2017-18: $10.5 million
2018-19: $8.5 million
2019-20: $6.5 million
2020-21: $3.5 Million
2021-22: $750,000
2022-23: $550,000
2023-24: $550,000
2024-25: $550,000
2025-26: $550,000
2026-27: $550,000

Now, there are a few things that make the Kovalchuk deal worse.

1. The bottom falls out of Richards’ deal in the last three years while Kovalchuk’s rejected contract featured a whopping six-year window in which one would assume he would retire.

2. Imagining Kovalchuk playing for $750K or $550K is slightly tougher to stomach than Richards playing for $1 million in the two players’ twilight years.

That being said, Kovalchuk’s deal is almost twice as long as Richards’ contract. In the grand scheme of things, there’s the same slap-you-in-the-face obviousness to the cap circumvention. Maybe the Rangers’ deal seems a little bit closer to reality, but the goal seems pretty much the same. There’s no real effort to disguise the drop in Richards’ deal when you look at the $6 million drop from his 2016-17 salary to his 2017-18 take-home.

For the sake of argument, here is the structure of the Kovalchuk deal the NHL reluctantly accepted.

2010-11: $6 million
2011-12: $6 million
2012-13: $11 million
2013-14: $11.3 million
2014-15: $11.3 million
2015-16: $11.6 million
2016-17: $11.8 million
2017-18: $10 million
2018-19: $7 million
2020-21: $4 million
2021-22: $1 million
2022-23: $1 million
2023-24: $1 million
2024-25: $3 million
2025-26: $4 million

Ultimately, it looks like the Richards deal will narrowly conform to the CBA amendments that the NHL and NHLPA hashed out after the Kovalchuk situation blew up. Richards deal goes now lower than $1 million, which seems to be the mark that will keep the league at bay.

That being said, the Richards deal basically shoves the letter/spirit of the law into the shredder. This must be a great sign for the Tampa Bay Lightning and Los Angeles Kings, at least if they intend to sign their respective restricted free agents Steven Stamkos and Drew Doughty to “lifetime contracts.” If the league lets this stand, it’s clear that last year’s work didn’t close a loophole; it just make the loophole a little smaller.

Habs prospect Juulsen out six weeks with fractured foot

Getty
Leave a comment

Tough news for the Montreal Canadiens and prospect defenseman Noah Juulsen on Thursday.

The Habs have announced that the 2015 first-round pick is expected to be sidelined six weeks after suffering a fractured foot on Monday.

The Habs selected Juulsen with the 26th overall pick in the 2015 NHL Draft following his 52-point regular season with the Everett Silvertips in the Western Hockey League.

This past spring, Juulsen appeared in two playoff games for the AHL’s St. John’s IceCaps. He turned 20 years old in April and it seemed like the Habs were going to give him a serious look to make the NHL club out of training camp.  

“We like the way he skates and his transition game,” said head coach Claude Julien earlier this week, before the injury was revealed. “He’s going to get a chance to make this team and if he doesn’t he’s not going to be too far away.”

Fight Video: Lappin, Puempel land some good shots in preseason tilt

MSG
Leave a comment

Who says players don’t care about preseason hockey?

Matt Puempel and Nick Lappin are trying to earn spots on their respective clubs, so they know they may have to do the little things others aren’t willing to do to stick around in the NHL.

On Wednesday night, that involved dropping the gloves against each other. These two seemed to be in mid-season form when it came to throwing punches.

Neither player is considered a tough guy. Lappin had 17 penalty minutes in 43 games with the Devils last season, while Puempel has 28 penalty minutes in 79 career NHL games.

Here’s the video footage of the scrap:

By the way, the Rangers won 4-3 in overtime.

Flames say they were prepared to contribute $275M for new arena

Getty
2 Comments

The arena situation in Calgary took another twist Thursday, with the Flames revealing that they had been prepared to contribute $275 million to a new arena.

The Flames released a nine-page report, which included the financial details of their proposed contributions. The organization said funding would also include $225 million from a Community Revitalization Levy, which would be generated from other developments in the immediate area around the arena.

Last week, it was reported that the Flames were no longer pursuing a new arena in Calgary. The club reiterated as much in their report Thursday.

“In a “small market” city, even one with an NHL team, a privately funded arena is not economically viable. The City’s proposal is just not workable (or even for that matter, “fair”, based on other arena deals in comparable cities),” the organization stated in the report.

“As a result, after over two years of discussions, we see absolutely no basis upon which a new arena agreement can be achieved with the City, and we have concluded that there is no point to continue the pursuit of a new arena in Calgary. Many, including us, believe Calgary is a terrific place for NHL hockey and we certainly have great fans. As such, we will strive to operate, as we have for the past 34 years, in the Saddledome for as long as we believe it is feasible.”

More from The Canadian Press:

The city proposed a three-way split on the cost of a $555-million arena, with the city and the Flames each paying $185 million and the remaining third raised from a surcharge on tickets sold to events in the new building.

Flames president Ken King contended the city’s plan amounted to the team paying the entire cost, or more, because the team considers a ticket surcharge paid by users revenue that belongs to the Flames and because they’d pay property tax back to the city.

The Flames current arena, the Saddledome, is now 34 years old and has drawn criticism in the past from NHL commissioner Gary Bettman. In 2015, the Flames unveiled their plans for a new arena — the CalgaryNEXT project — with an original cost of $890 million.

The city said at the time that the original proposed plan was not feasible. This issue has since continued for over two years now. In June, Brian Burke said the Flames could leave Calgary without a new arena. King, himself, has said the current arena situation in Calgary is not “viable in the near or long-term.”

“That’s why we’re having this discussion is about a new facility,” King told the Calgary Herald. “So, if we’re successful in that initiative, our near and long-term future is here (in Calgary). If not, we have to decide what the alternatives are … Anyone can connect the dots to how many choices we have left.

“If we don’t get a deal, what are our choices?”

There was also this from the commissioner.

Kings outlast Canucks in first edition of NHL China Games

Leave a comment

The Los Angeles Kings came away with a 5-2 preseason win over the Vancouver Canucks in the first of the 2017 NHL China Games. This contest took place in lovely Shanghai.

Adrian Kempe got the ball rolling for Kings, as he scored the first goal of the game on the power play to make it 1-0 for his team (top).

Kings forward Tanner Pearson scored a great shorthanded breakaway goal to extend Los Angeles’ lead to 2-0 (check out the Pearson goal by clicking the video below).

The shorthanded goal against wasn’t the only issue the Canucks power play had in this game. Vancouver managed to score once on the man-advantage, but they finished the game 1-for-14 in that department (yes, it’s only a preseason game).

with Vancouver trailing 3-0 in the second period, Sven Baertschi finally got them on the board to cut the Kings lead to 3-1.

Markus Granlund made it 3-2 in the third period, but that’s as close as the Canucks would come to tying the score.

Pearson extended Los Angeles’ lead to 4-2 before Jeff Carter finished off the game with an empty-net goal.

These two teams will meet again in Beijing on Saturday at 3:30 a.m. ET.