Written by Lyle Richardson Sunday, 29 August 2010 10:13
Ever since arbiter Richard Bloch in early August ruled in favor of the NHL’s rejection of Ilya Kovalchuk’s 17-year, $102 million contract with the New Jersey Devils there’ve been a seemingly steady stream of reports noting the contracts of four notable NHL stars remain under investigation for possible salary cap circumvention.
The contracts of Vancouver’s Roberto Luongo, Philadelphia’s Chris Pronger, Chicago’s Marian Hossa and Boston’s Marc Savard – signed between July and December 2009 –had reportedly been scrutinized by the league since last year.
They were also singled out by Bloch in his ruling on the Kovalchuk contract dispute giving rise to rumors the NHL could retroactively reject one or all of those contracts.
League officials, notably deputy commissioner Bill Daly, when questioned persist in their claim those contracts remain under review, which of course only stokes the speculation.
If anything however it appears the league is merely using their “investigations” in the wake of their arbitration victory in the Kovalchuk case as a means of warning teams from signing players to similar lengthy, front-loaded contracts between now and the end of the current CBA, set to expire in September 2012.
The league has been “investigating” all but Savard’s contract for over a year now. If there was anything in those contracts (and Savard’s) which constituted salary cap circumvention or any other violation of the current CBA they’d have found it by now.
Rejecting those contracts would also create more headaches for the league.
The biggest would come from the Philadelphia Flyers, whose front office considers Pronger’s contract, set to begin this October, to be in compliance with league rules and therefore not an issue.
Daly recently suggested otherwise but it’s doubtful they’ll reject the Pronger deal especially since the Flyers would fight such a move.
The last thing the league needs is to antagonize the Flyers ownership, led by Ed Snider, considered an ally of NHL commissioner Gary Bettman as well as one of the most influential team owners in the league.
It’s been suggested the Canucks ownership might be happy to get out from under Luongo’s contract but reports out of Vancouver in recent weeks suggest otherwise, meaning they too would likely seek to fight such a move via pleading with the NHLPA to file a grievance.
The Bruins, who are owned by Jeremy Jacobs, a Bettman loyalist, were reportedly trying to shop Savard this summer. They’ve given little indication as to their opinion.
As for Hossa, he’s already played one year under his contract, and while the CBA does indicate the league can revisit a contract at any time it could prove to be a nasty legal nightmare to do so.
What could possibly be staying the league’s hand? If salary cap circumvention is the issue, why didn’t the league reject those contracts when they were signed? Why haven’t they made a move by now?
If the NHL truly has issues with those aforementioned contracts it should’ve actioned them by now.
This kind of open-ended investigation has to date revealed nothing which the league could act upon to reject those contracts.
To repeat: It merely gives the impression the league is using these “investigations” as a means of warning teams away from attempting to sign star players to similar deals.
Of course it remains to be seen between now and the summer of 2012 if that warning will be heeded.
Written by Lyle Richardson Wednesday, 25 August 2010 09:50
International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) president Rene Fasel apparently doesn’t like the idea of the NHL possibly expanding into European countries.
During the recent World Hockey Summit in Toronto Fasel had this to say about it (Hat tip to Puck Daddy Greg Wyshynski):
"Try to come. Good luck. This is our territory and I will fight like hell and not allow anybody to come from abroad. I think in Europe we are strong enough to do something on our own, and then have the competition between Europe and North America. That makes the fan happy. That's really what we should do.
"Having the North American side and the European side ... this is the old story. The '72 series. For sure it was Canada and [the Soviet Union] at that time, but it was Europe against North America. That makes the fan happy.
"I don't think an NHL division in Europe would fly. If they have a lot of money to invest, they can try. But as long as I'm sitting in my chair I wouldn't allow it."
Fasel instead envisions the following:
“(A) European league, where we have five, six teams from Sweden and the KHL together with the Finns, the Germans, the Swiss and then try to have a European champion and having this European champion play the Stanley Cup winner. That would be, for the hockey fans, music.”
Fasell’s comments would suggest he’s concerned about the world’s biggest pro league expanding into the European markets.
That however is something many years, perhaps a couple of decades or more, into the future, if it happens at all.
NHL expansion into Europe popped up as a serious topic of discussion following the famous 1972 Summit Series between Canada and the then-Soviet Union.
While a steady supply of top European talent has migrated to the NHL since the 1970s and the NHL has increased in recent years the number of pre-season games between its teams in select European cities, don’t expect to see new NHL franchises popping up in Europe anytime soon.
If the NHL were however to seriously look at having a “European division” one would assume those teams would end up playing themselves more often than playing in North America, let alone most of the North American-based franchises travelling to Europe given the high travel costs and physical toll of such lengthy road trips.
Furthermore one has to believe most NHL team owners wouldn't like the idea of European teams having a better chance of signing and retaining the best European free agent talent, potentially robbing North American-based franchises of a chance to have most if not all the best European talent playing on this continent.
An NHL division would certainly be a novelty for European fans but the league might face a difficult establishing itself in countries where there are already long-established leagues with rich histories which have had fanatical followings for decades.
The same goes for the Kontinental Hockey League’s dream of a European “super league”. That was an idea floated by some pundits (before the formation of the KHL) during the NHL lockout.At the time I spoke with several folks who follow European hockey as fans, bloggers and pundits and they told me such a notion would be very difficult to achieve, given fan loyalty toward the current established leagues, the difficulty in attracting commercial sponsors and broadcasting revenue necessary to keep such a league afloat plus the lack of NHL capacity arenas and the ownership willing to invest in such a league, as well as the high cost to European fans used to a more affordable product.
Packing arenas for a few NHL pre-season games is one thing, but attracting hockey fans to a considerably more expensive NHL division or European super league won’t be easy regardless of the quality of the product or the presence of star players.
That would probably explain Fasel’s “fighting words” over NHL European expansion.
