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?

Will be very interesting on how the league approaches this situation since it will arise again with more foreign players coming into the league and the success of the KHL. I think you may be on to something as for as some sort of penalty involved. Not sure taking away all draft picks would be the answer. The league needs to make sure they think this one through before making any decision.

The NHL will come down on it soon. Some of these are clear cut violations of what the cap was for. It won't happen over night though, so it might not happen within this off season. Changes like that, take quite a bit of time before they are ratified but sure enough the NHL does not want this going forward and will put the correct language in the CBA to stop things like this from happening soon.

I am however still fuzzy on the terms of how it would all work.

If Datsyuk retires of his own accord, Detroit does not have to pay him a single penny? but has to keep his entire cap hit regardless because he's on a 35+ contract?

If so, trading Datsyuk to Arizona/New Jersey for Pronger/Savard makes perfect sense for both parties right? Arizona/NJ does not spend more than 60M a season on cap anyway so adding Datsyuk's cap hit does not effect them negatively at all since they wouldn't have to pay him actual money. His high cap hit makes it easier to reach the cap floor so that is also a bonus. They send to Detroit Pronger/Savard contract which the team has to pay his actual salary of 575K but since he is permanently injured, the team acquiring him can place him on permanent LTIR which would rid them of his cap hit. They would still need to pay him (Or maybe they don't because insurance pays for most of it?) but they now have Datsyuk and Pronger/Savard's contract off their salary cap at the small expense of 575K that they are paying to Pronger/Savard.

Can someone who has a good understanding of these inner workings of the NHL/CBA disprove anything I just said? Is there some thing i mentioned above that is not true?

I see all these trade scenario's involving Detroit having to give Arizona a prospect or high draft pick as a sweetener for Chayka to accept something like this but given my statement above (If its all valid), isn't Chayka already winning this trade by ridding himself of Pronger's salary that his owner is actually paying out to him still (Minus insurance, if applies, etc) plus he's getting a higher cap hit to help reach his team to the cap floor and he is literally not being effected negatively in any way for the salary cap maximum because Arizona isn't going to spend that extra cap space anyway?

I just want to make sure i fully understand so I'm not making false claims going forward.

I appreciate the thoughtful responses snd not the usual cutdowns I tend to receive (not that anyone gives a ****!)

Well the League did allow Detroit to trade the cap hit of a retired player. A couple of years ago, since the newest CBA was signed, Kovlechuk(?)'s contract was terminated when he decided to bail out and play in the KHL. Was is this situation any different besides the term and subsequent recapture penalty? The League bent over backwards to appease Holland IMO. Believe me, this isn't just a bewildered Blackhawks fan whining. It appears to be very wrong yet doable for whatever reason.