DaneykoIsGod Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Very, very short sighted view. We were a playoff team WITHOUT Kovalchuk. We gave up alot of quality players to fit him in the cap, we lost a lot of quality depth players in the trade and most important we lost a TEAM identity and will lose Parise. Don't forget that the Devils were in the midst of a 3-wins-in-10-games slump when Kovy got traded here. The seeds of the team's woes were planted well before he got here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRASHER Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 And enough of this "the Devils lost their identity" BS. They haven't lived up to their "identity" for years. If anything, bringing in Kovalchuk is an attempt at forging a new identity, and I'm all for that. The Devils that won three Cups are gone. The league has changed, the team has changed, it's time to move on, try to adapt, and hopefully figure out how to succeed in today's NHL. That "identity" and the concept of defense first, second and third died with the lockout (unless you have a goalie who was on Tim Thomas' level last year, and I don't think even Brodeur's ever been THAT good for a full single 82-game season and playoff run like Thomas had last year) Still I wish our 6 million dollar plus players were CENTERS....but hell Parise and Kovy looked damn good together last night, maybe this is a sign of good things to come.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Good point. Manta's all like, "Oh, we gave up sooooo much to get Kovalchuk", but really, we didn't. Wow, you just don't get the bigger picture of what we lost. I guess it really doesn't matter as the damage to the franchise is done. Years from now this trade will be looked upon as the begining of the end for professional hockey in NJ. As we miss the playoffs, lose Parise and Marty moves towards retirement the Rock will start to look more and more like Phillips arena attendance and will probably move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin226 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Good point. Manta's all like, "Oh, we gave up sooooo much to get Kovalchuk", but really, we didn't. Cormier may be worth something someday, but right now he's not doing much. I liked Bergfors and wanted him to do well, but he hasn't lived up to his hype. Oduya's a decent defenseman but he's no Lidstrom. I'd trade him for a guy like Kovalchuk any day of the week. And enough of this "the Devils lost their identity" BS. They haven't lived up to their "identity" for years. If anything, bringing in Kovalchuk is an attempt at forging a new identity, and I'm all for that. The Devils that won three Cups are gone. The league has changed, the team has changed, it's time to move on, try to adapt, and hopefully figure out how to succeed in today's NHL. Great post!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrthemike Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Wow, you just don't get the bigger picture of what we lost. I guess it really doesn't matter as the damage to the franchise is done. Years from now this trade will be looked upon as the begining of the end for professional hockey in NJ. As we miss the playoffs, lose Parise and Marty moves towards retirement the Rock will start to look more and more like Phillips arena attendance and will probably move. Does someone have a case of the Mondays? It's not even Monday! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caron14 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 The Kovalchuk Trade is a a awesome one... It will pay dividend pretty soon. We see how good kovalchuk is and how bad he want to win ! Yes we have a bad season. But in the second half we witness the potential of this team. Kovalchuk is the Devils beast and at 6,66 cap we have enough cap space to sign who we want... if pittburg can have crosby at 8,9 and malkin at 8,7 we can have parisé at 6 m and kovalchhuk at 6,6. Oh and Spoiler i think the Devils could go after Jonathan Bernier at the end of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Don't forget that the Devils were in the midst of a 3-wins-in-10-games slump when Kovy got traded here. The seeds of the team's woes were planted well before he got here. Unfortunately, the seeds of our woes were planted during our recorded breaking start to the 2009-10 season when Lemaire didn't like the fact that the team was winning with offense. He inexplicably punished players until the team tuned him out and pretty much forced him to retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Oduya isnt better than anyone on our D. Ask any Thrasher/Jets fan Cormier COULD be useful on our 4th line Bergfors is floundering around the league. I just dont see it Manta I am not talking about the head-to-head trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Unfortunately, the seeds of our woes were planted during our recorded breaking start to the 2009-10 season when Lemaire didn't like the fact that the team was winning with offense. He inexplicably punished players until the team tuned him out and pretty much forced him to retire. it's a shame that you have gone off the deep end, because it was fun to debate you when you were at least trying to sound sane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted October 26, 2011 Author Share Posted October 26, 2011 Wow, you just don't get the bigger picture of what we lost. I guess it really doesn't matter as the damage to the franchise is done. Years from now this trade will be looked upon as the begining of the end for professional hockey in NJ. As we miss the playoffs, lose Parise and Marty moves towards retirement the Rock will start to look more and more like Phillips arena attendance and will probably move. What big picture? We didnt miss the playoffs because of Kovalchuk if anything we almost made them because of him, its all on MacLean that season and we all know it. We had our chances post-lockout and we never made it through the 2nd round and the building is mostly empty... something had to change then Parise is still here for all we know and you have no clue whats gonna happen so dont use that in your delusional explanation on why the trade was bad until something actually happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 (edited) Years from now this trade will be looked upon as the begining of the end for professional hockey in NJ. As we miss the playoffs, lose Parise and Marty moves towards retirement the Rock will start to look more and more like Phillips arena attendance and will probably move. This right here, this is why I often disregard your thoughts on this matter. Either you're trolling pretty well, or you actually believe what you're saying. Which means you're one of those 'worst-case-scenario' fans, constantly thinking the worst about every, single aspect of the team. I hope it's not the latter, as you do seem very knowledgeable about Devils hockey. But seriously, you're dangerously close to (to pull a relevant example) a lot of Rutgers alumni I know. They've all convinced themselves that the Big east is going to collapse, and when it does that Rutgers will be left out in the cold and that 'football at Rutgers will die'. There's literally no reason to suspect something like that will happen, yet somehow people still convince themselves that it's the truth and make themselves miserable to talk sports with. You're approaching that status in my mind Manta. There really isn't much factual evidence to support your argument, it's mostly just opinion. And your opinion seems to be of a..debbie downer variety. You can cite the Devils awful first-half last year, or the lack of scoring. But I'm of the mindset that the Devils would've struggled had Kovy not been acquired. What had this 'Devils-mentality' that you keep mentioning gotten the Devils in recent years? A bunch of first-round exits? I'm quite okay with a minor rebuild and a change of philosophy. It was time anyway. Edited October 26, 2011 by Devilsfan118 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 it's a shame that you have gone off the deep end, because it was fun to debate you when you were at least trying to sound sane. Yes, and the Devils will win the Stanley Cup as you predicted they would last year. Tri, I could care less what you think as you have never brought anything valid to the "debate" table. You rarely know what your talking about. You can hide behind fanciful numbers to impress the novices and uninitiated. You are also great at reneging on wagers when your caught and your BS doesn't fly. Take that off your deep end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 What big picture? We didnt miss the playoffs because of Kovalchuk if anything we almost made them because of him, its all on MacLean that season and we all know it. We had our chances post-lockout and we never made it through the 2nd round and the building is mostly empty... something had to change then Parise is still here for all we know and you have no clue whats gonna happen so dont use that in your delusional explanation on why the trade was bad until something actually happen So your saying Kovalchuk didn't play the first half of 2010? Not going to say that MacLean isn't partially responsible, but if the coach put you on the ice and you don't perform, that is not on the coach 100% I assume your going to blame Bettmen, and the officials too for Kovalchuk's poor play. The 2009-10 team was one of the best groups in team history (prior to getting Kovy). Lemaire lost the locker room and forced the Kovy trade. Post lock out, we blew some easy chances, but that was no reason to blow up a successful franchise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted October 26, 2011 Author Share Posted October 26, 2011 So your saying Kovalchuk didn't play the first half of 2010? Not going to say that MacLean isn't partially responsible, but if the coach put you on the ice and you don't perform, that is not on the coach 100% I assume your going to blame Bettmen, and the officials too for Kovalchuk's poor play. The 2009-10 team was one of the best groups in team history (prior to getting Kovy). Lemaire lost the locker room and forced the Kovy trade. Post lock out, we blew some easy chances, but that was no reason to blow up a successful franchise. Do you realize how big your blinders are really? Every single player played bad under Maclean and thats a fact. When you lose straight time then change your coach and start a crazy winning streak, it was the coach and not the players. How 'bout the Pens under Therrien few years back? Was it really Crosby and Malkin's fault? They fired Therrien and won the cup and we didnt blow up the franchise, none of the players traded was really part of our core Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 So your saying Kovalchuk didn't play the first half of 2010? Not going to say that MacLean isn't partially responsible, but if the coach put you on the ice and you don't perform, that is not on the coach 100% I assume your going to blame Bettmen, and the officials too for Kovalchuk's poor play. The 2009-10 team was one of the best groups in team history (prior to getting Kovy). Lemaire lost the locker room and forced the Kovy trade. Post lock out, we blew some easy chances, but that was no reason to blow up a successful franchise. Ok, let's play this game... 2009-10 opening night roster, which you consider one of the best groups in team history: Fowards: Bergfors, Clarkson, Elias, Halischuk, Langenbrunner, Leblond, Pikkarainen, Niedermayer, Pandolfo, Parise, Pelley, Peters, Rolston, Zajac, Zubrus Defense: Fraser, Greene, Martin, Mottau, Murphy, Oduya, Salvador, White Goal: Brodeur, Danis Now, remove Bergfors, Halischuk, Langenbrunner, Leblond, Pikkarainen, Niedermayer, Pandolfo, Peters, Rolston. Replace with Kovalchuk, Boulton, Henrique, Janssen, Josefesen, Mills, Palmieri, Sykora, Tedenby. Remove Martin, Mottau, Murphy, Oduya, White. Replace with Fayne, Larsson, Tallinder, Volchenkov. Remove Danis, replace with Hedberg. This current group is a MUCH better group at forward, at the very least even on defense, and much better in goal. Now, your other point, which is that Kovalchuk costs us Parise. There is enough money for both. If Parise leaves because he can't handle not being the only elite player on the team, then that's on Parise. If he leaves because Lou refuses to give him the money he's worth, that's on Lou. Wouldn't Parise only wanting to stay if he gets to be top banana ALSO go against your TEAM idea? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 People are still having this conversation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe B Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 So your saying Kovalchuk didn't play the first half of 2010? Not going to say that MacLean isn't partially responsible, but if the coach put you on the ice and you don't perform, that is not on the coach 100% I assume your going to blame Bettmen, and the officials too for Kovalchuk's poor play. The 2009-10 team was one of the best groups in team history (prior to getting Kovy). Lemaire lost the locker room and forced the Kovy trade. Post lock out, we blew some easy chances, but that was no reason to blow up a successful franchise. So Lou didn't make the trade to acquire a former number 1 overall pick because he became available. He was forced to make the trade. Most teams try to add for the playoff push, most teams don't get as talented a player as a missing piece to there puzzle. Exactly how often do top 10 talent become available? How is adding a top 10 player blowing up the franchise? If you think getting kovy means zach is leaving, why can't zach leave even if Kovy doesn't join the team? And if getting kovy might mean zach leaving and the death of the franchise, why isn't zach's injury last year part of the death of that season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Manta -- wait a sec. I am confused. I cannot take all of your posts and come up with a unified theory of the Kovalchuk signing resulting in the demise of the Devils as we know and love them. I read expected outcomes but I have no interconnected reasons. I see a lot of divergence - not your own doing - but nonetheless irrelevant to the actual point. What EXACTLY does the Kovalchuk signing indicate? What is the detrimental change in philosophy that he is responsible for? Please don't point to things you expect us to lose or things we lost before he was signed (Parise is still here - Marty is going to have to retire) (If you're on Lemaire for killing off offense - then you're not upset about the loss of a defensive system....) To honestly communicate what you're feeling here we can't have examples by way of explanation --- it's not making logical sense to me when I try to piece it all together. To say you've said it all before -- I'm telling you you haven't. Nothing fits in to make a logical picture - your contradicting yourself on every point except the one statement - Signing Kovalchuk has already irreparably brought about the demise of the Devils. How? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 (edited) I wish we coudl all be untied :rofl UNITED and just get Manta to articulate how signing kovalchuk has brought down the Devils now and forever "until he's bought out like Rolston" as Manta wrote in another thread. All this jibber jabber on one point or another isnt' getting us any answer and no one has Manta on the run. You can't get him on this until he articulates the problem with the signing in a nutshell. You all get pulled off into different arguments and he choses to respond to the questions that get us no further to the real answer to our real single question. What did the Devils lose in signing Kovalchuk? Edited October 26, 2011 by Pepperkorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 So your saying Kovalchuk didn't play the first half of 2010? Not going to say that MacLean isn't partially responsible, but if the coach put you on the ice and you don't perform, that is not on the coach 100% I assume your going to blame Bettmen, and the officials too for Kovalchuk's poor play. So it's Kovalchuk's fault the team got off to their historically-bad start? The team's problems went far beyond Kovalchuk not performing. Removing him wouldn't have made a difference. The 2009-10 team was one of the best groups in team history (prior to getting Kovy). Lemaire lost the locker room and forced the Kovy trade. Well then, there you go. Ilya Kovalchuk didn't destroy the New Jersey Devils, Jacques Lemaire did. Post lock out, we blew some easy chances, but that was no reason to blow up a successful franchise. Blowing an easy chance once is one thing. Blowing easy chances consistently, year after year, is a sign that something's broken. Post-lockout, the pre-lockout Devils philosophy wasn't working anymore. Too bad it took Lou half a decade to realize, come to terms with, and do something about it. Just to be clear, though: one trade does not constitute blowing up the franchise. This merely accelerated a needed shift in philosophy. Now, your other point, which is that Kovalchuk costs us Parise. There is enough money for both. If Parise leaves because he can't handle not being the only elite player on the team, then that's on Parise. If he leaves because Lou refuses to give him the money he's worth, that's on Lou. Wouldn't Parise only wanting to stay if he gets to be top banana ALSO go against your TEAM idea? If you think getting kovy means zach is leaving, why can't zach leave even if Kovy doesn't join the team? And if getting kovy might mean zach leaving and the death of the franchise, why isn't zach's injury last year part of the death of that season? Hush, guys, that's far too logical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitico12 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 (edited) Bottom line, Kovy's got a scorer's ego. If you make him the center of the team's universe, perhaps it will work out well for that team. If you make him a supplemental part of the team's universe, it could backfire. He's russian, and with no offense to anyone here, the only two Russians I would trust on my team are: Sergei Brylin and Pavol Datsyuk Russian players are ego-driven, money-satisfied athletes. Team success with the newer generation of Russians means little... Just ask Alexander Semin... Edited October 26, 2011 by Mitico12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Mitco that's fine for a bottom line -- and it's yours. But what is Manta's that every move the team makes with the exception of the Larssen draft - is the fault of the Kovalchuk signing. Every post is negative. I dont mind that but I do not understand how. The winning Devils of years past were built very much around Slava Fetisov so his being Russian won't cut it for Manta either. For him, it's something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted October 26, 2011 Author Share Posted October 26, 2011 Mitco that's fine for a bottom line -- and it's yours. But what is Manta's that every move the team makes with the exception of the Larssen draft - is the fault of the Kovalchuk signing. Every post is negative. I dont mind that but I do not understand how. The winning Devils of years past were built very much around Slava Fetisov so his being Russian won't cut it for Manta either. For him, it's something else. im pretty sure Manta is just trolling... he can't be serious really. He's ignoring any questions that would tell us exactly what the problem is or he's answering with suppositions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgeControl Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 This trade is a travesty, and we need to get jamie langenbrunner back ASAP! then things will be OK and correct the doings of the evil jacques lemaire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevsftw Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Russian players are ego-driven, money-satisfied athletes. Team success with the newer generation of Russians means little... Just ask Alexander Semin... Unlike American athletes who are all about self sacrifice and team spirit. Just ask A-Rod, Kobe, Shaq etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.