Joined: Jun. 2015
Posts: 1,729
Likes: 288
One of this off season's most controversial issues will be how the Datsyuk ordeal is dealt with by the League. While he intends to make his decision known today, what should the fallout be should he renege on his binding contract? If the League had balls, it would punish both participating teams equally. That is, should an otherwise perfectly able player quit before his contract is completed and his cap hit is traded to another team [for purposes of reaching the cap floor], either team would forfeit all of their draft picks, including acquired ones, for the following year. In Detroit's case, they want to clear a $7.5M hit so they can woo whomever they want to replace Datsyuk in this instance. I say that is fine but with severe consequences. Likewise, the team who trades for an otherwise perfectly able player simply to become cap compliant, they would also be subject to the same outcome as stated. The purpose of this stiff penalty is similar to the recapture notion agreed upon in the 2013 CBA, only it would apply to seperate teams. Additionally, another case might be that of Vinny Lecavalier who retired with two years left on his contract that was signed after the current CBA and before he was 35. Not sure if the League has any stipulations already in place should the Kings want to trade his contract to a cap floor team like they allow for a "Prongered" player. However, again, either team should be punished in a similar fashion.
Thoughts from the lynch mob?