Richard Bloch the arbitrator in the Ilya Kovalchuk arbitration hearing has finally announced his decision in the case. He has sided with the NHL and decided to reject the 17 year Ilya Kovalchuk contract.
The NHL Official statement from NHL.com: "We want to thank Arbitrator Bloch for his prompt resolution of a complex issue. His ruling is consistent with the League's view of the manner in which the Collective Bargaining Agreement should deal with contracts that circumvent the Salary Cap."
Arbitrator Bloch: "this is a retirement contract" "well beyond the typical retirement age for NHL players" per @RealKyper...
The NHLPA: “The NHLPA is disappointed with the Arbitrator’s ruling to uphold the NHL’s rejection of the contract between the New Jersey Devils and Ilya Kovalchuk. The NHLPA is currently reviewing the decision and will have no further comment at this time.”
Lou Lamoriello “We have reviewed and respect Arbitrator Bloch's ruling in the Kovalchuk matter. We also note and appreciate his finding that nothing in his opinion should be read as suggesting that either the club or Ilya Kovalchuk operated in bad faith or on the basis of any assumption other than that the Standard Player Contract was fully compliant with the CBA. That has been our consistent position throughout. While we do not currently have a contract with Ilya Kovalchuk, discussions have resumed and we are hopeful that a contract will be reached that meets with the principles in Arbitrator Bloch's award and the NHL's approval."
Excerpts from arbitrator Richard Bloch's ruling, obtained by SportingNews.com: "In this case, the record strongly supports the claim this contract is "intended to, or has the effect" of defeating or circumventing the Salary Cap provisions of the CBA. The overall structure of this SPC reflects not so much the hope that Mr. Kovalchuk will be playing in those advanced years, but rather the expectation that he will not. This is a long contract --17 years -- the longest in NHL history. That, in itself, poses no contractual problem, for the reasons discussed above. But Kovalchuk is 27 years old, and the agreement contemplates his playing until just short of his 44th birthday. That is not impossible, but it is, at the least, markedly rare. Currently, only one player in the League has played past 43and, over the past 20 years only 6 of some 3400 players have played to 42...."
More from the report regarding finances: "...The dynamics of this SPC, with particular reference to its final six years, are such that there is scarce reason for either Player or Club to continue the relationship. The incentives are strongly to the contrary. By year 11, the Player will have received $98,000,000 of his $102,000,000 contract, constituting some 97% of the bargain. One may reasonably ask, as the League does, whether a player who had been averaging some $9,000,000 a year will be satisfied to continue the rigors of an NHL season for a salary that (1) will average slightly more than $550,000 a year, (2) will represent a 95% reduction against previous average earnings and (3) will undoubtedly constitute compensation well below the then-applicable major league minimum. The economic incentives are not limited to issues of the Player's preferences, alone. During the final six years, the comprehensive "No Move" restriction will have been reduced to a "No Trade" clause. This additional flexibility will allow the Club to, for example, place the Player on waivers or send him to the minors. Here again, one may reasonably ask whether this Player would, at that point, accept such repositioning as an alternative to seeking continued employment outside the League or simply retiring."
The conclusion: "...the System Arbitrator here concludes the SPC terms themselves demonstrate this agreement 'has the effect of defeating' the provisions of the CBA, with particular reference to the Team Payroll Range language. For these reasons, the finding is that the League has sustained its burden of demonstrating its actions in rejecting the agreement were in accordance with the bargained authority under Section 11.6(a)(i). Accordingly, the grievance protesting that action will be denied."
Join me after this for more on the Kovalchuk news and my thoughts....
