Last week it came out that the NHL is investigating the Marian Hossa contract. A day later, they added Mr. High Elbows McPronger to their “contracts of interest” list. They said that they “want to know if the possibility of player retirement was ever discussed or even contemplated.” If it was, then it would violate the tampering clause of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and could lead to both a fine and loss of draft picks if the team is found in violation. This sounds all very important.
For anyone that isn’t sure where the debate comes from, let me break it down. A few teams have signed a few players to extremely long term contracts as a means to get around the salary cap. What they do is have a contract that pays a player a consistent salary for a reasonable amount of time, but then tack on a few extra years at bargain basement prices. This serves to significantly lower the per year average of the contract, thus lowering the salary cap hit for the team.
Psst, Hossa... I know its a 12-year deal... but you're going to retire after 8, right?
If the contract is signed BEFORE the player is 35, then the player can retire at any time and their cap hit is completely wiped from the books. So hypothetically speaking, a player could make something like $7 million per year, and then in the last few years his contract could dip down to $1 million per year. He could retire right when his contract is set to dip—thus the cap hit was LOWER while he played and disappears when he retires. There’s absolutely NO downside to the team.
The bigger question the NHL is investigating is TAMPERING. Not only do they want to know if there was an understanding, they want to know if the player, agent and organization specifically talked about a player retiring at a certain point to help all sides. Good luck proving that NHL.
Just so everyone understands, there’s nothing illegal about the way the contracts are structured. The long-term contracts with descending pay scales, while new, are completely legal. The reason the Hossa and Pronger deals are under scrutiny are because there are questions whether the Blackhawks and Flyers discussed the possibility of retirement before the players played out the duration of their contracts. Under the CBA, that is considered “tampering.” Let me get this straight: the deals in question are completely fine, but the teams talking to the players about their effect is not? Consider this a rather large loophole.
Let me use common sense and answer the NHL’s question. OF COURSE the teams talked about retirement with the players that are signed to long contracts! Stop trying to make it more complicated than it is. Obviously the teams are trying to get around the salary cap by signing superstar players to sizable contracts; then taking on a few extra years at LOW per year salaries. Both sides know how the game is played, so there’s no doubt that there was an understanding in place.
Does tampering go on? That’s a stupid question. Does the Pope shit in the woods? Yes, tampering goes on—and here’s another revelation; this isn’t the first time! Ever since there were rules regarding player contracts, the owners, agents and players have been working together to find ways around those rules. This isn’t an NHL specific problem either (nor sports related), this happens in all walks of life. Go ahead and make some rules prohibiting it—call me when those rules stop the practice. I won’t wait by the phone.
"You promise you're not going to play into your 40's, right Chris?"
How do you think that Tampa Bay is able to hammer out a 7 year deal with Mattias Ohlund 21 minutes after the free agency period opens? Multi-million dollar decisions that will affect the rest of a player’s career—and the decision is made in less time than it takes to make Rice-A-Roni in the microwave? Please.
If they truly think there’s a problem, then I’m glad they’re looking into it now. Unfortunately, I get the distinct impression that this is a knee-jerk reaction to some comments that Toronto GM Brian Burke made in the media at the beginning of last week. He doesn’t think these are good for the game.
Interesting, isn’t it? The GM of the self-proclaimed “Mecca of the Hockey World,” says there’s a problem and it’s automatically investigated? It sounds like Burke came out and said that he didn’t like these long-term deals, and now all the sudden the NHL is looking into the super deals? Is that all he has to do? If he says that he wants a midget at his next birthday, will Gary Bettman show up to please him?
The truth is that if Brian Burke was the man that started this practice, he’d be completely fine with it. Since this practice is preventing him from luring free agents to Toronto because they’re all locked up with teams who have their rights (Zetterberg, Franzen, Pronger, etc.), he’s throwing a fit.
There are a ton of unspoken things that go on in our society. In all walks of life, there are things that are going on that are simply understood. Either the public looks the other way or they’re in on it. You don’t hear about anyone looking at online porn, yet it’s a multi-billion dollar industry. Unless there’s only one incredibly rich person with epic endurance, I’m guessing there a few people that check it out. Hell, there are more than a few people that PAY to look at it!
In related news, apparently baseball had people that used pharmaceuticals to help their performance. And you tell me that people don’t look the other way.
Hopefully in 2011 the owners and the players get together and fix this loophole that’s in the CBA. I don’t necessarily think it’s a HUGE problem and for the most part I could care less, but if there are people that think it’s going to hurt the game—then get rid of it. Just don’t punish people for simply TALKING about it behind closed doors.
Matt Reitz is the Editor-In-Chief here at ViewFromMySeats.com and former NHL Writer for ProHockeyTalk on NBCSports. When he’s not shoving a mic in the face of NHLers or explaining why home teams should wear white, he’s usually trying to figure out what song to play next on his iPod. It’s a never-ending job.
