Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
TomsRiverDevil

Kovalpuke

57 posts in this topic

This was a gift to the franchise. At least now we can start to rebuild a real team in the tradition of Devils hockey and a winning. Wasn't a fan of the Neo-Thrashers direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd still welcome Kovy back if he had a desire to come back.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as my original post, I think we was an awesome player who made the team more successful. It just never felt like he fit in. Almost like he was too good for the team. Things had to be adjusted to fit him him, it just never seemed natural. From my singular fan perspective, it is just more fun to root for a team like our current lineup, as opposed to one with a superduperstar. I guess it works that our greatest superstar over the last two decades played goal, and not so much a teamlike position.

All this was a brief thought I had after the last win over the rangers, realizing in a quick moment that was having more fun following this team without having to worry about kovalchuk, for whatever reason. I think it sucks he left, but am also thankful. I don't really harbor any deep hatred or resentment of him.

Go devils!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've gotten over him.  At least we don't have to play against him like we do Parise.

And if I had to choose one, I'd take Parise back over Kovy. Parise would fit like a glove in the re-team orientated Devils. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if I had to choose one, I'd take Parise back over Kovy. Parise would fit like a glove in the re-team orientated Devils. 

 

I'd love Parise back.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd still welcome Kovy back if he had a desire to come back.

i would welcome him back too.. but posts like this are just stupid really.. he did us all a favor by ridding that terrible contract that wouldve waited us down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would welcome him back too.. but posts like this are just stupid really.. he did us all a favor by ridding that terrible contract that wouldve waited us down.

 

I know he's not coming back.  Relax my man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know he's not coming back.  Relax my man.

iam relaxed boss.. i just dont get the ignorance of some people on this.. i said a couple weeks ago i was waiting on line to take a piss at the rock one night and some drunk moron and his friend were taking a piss and going on and on like a couple of whiney babys that didnt know what the hell they were talking about.. who really cares about this guy anymore he did us all a favor.. yea were stuck with some penalties but were better off with the penalties then the contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are overreacting a bit with contracts i find. I mean its like they'll use it as a closure to convince themselves that its for the best and that its better to have no stars at all than to overpay one.

Kovy gone...oh well his contract was horrible!!!

Zach is gone... Well i wouldnt want that contract...

Clarkson.. Etc etc...

I mean... You guys think the ducks "want" getzlaf or perry's contract? Pens fans want crosby or malkin contract? Nashville want shea's contract etc etc. toews and kane next contract? Im sure hawks fans are not looking forward to that. All of those contracts will look bad at some point or course. Most top players has a big and long contract, thats the reality, you want to drive a ferrari? Well guess what youll have the payments that goes with it.

Dont get me wrong, having bad contracts sucks. But you wont get an impact player for cheap in this league, so you have to suck it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are overreacting a bit with contracts i find. I mean its like they'll use it as a closure to convince themselves that its for the best and that its better to have no stars at all than to overpay one.

Kovy gone...oh well his contract was horrible!!!

Zach is gone... Well i wouldnt want that contract...

Clarkson.. Etc etc...

I mean... You guys think the ducks "want" getzlaf or perry's contract? Pens fans want crosby or malkin contract? Nashville want shea's contract etc etc. toews and kane next contract? Im sure hawks fans are not looking forward to that. All of those contracts will look bad at some point or course. Most top players has a big and long contract, thats the reality, you want to drive a ferrari? Well guess what youll have the payments that goes with it.

Dont get me wrong, having bad contracts sucks. But you wont get an impact player for cheap in this league, so you have to suck it up.

That mentality sunk the Habs for years. Rags too. Big contracts are crippling. Especially when the players start to decline. The Crosy and Malkin contracts are reasonable. The Kovalchuk and Parise ones were/are not. And I felt that way (and communicated it) long before we lost both guys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That mentality sunk the Habs for years. Rags too. Big contracts are crippling. Especially when the players start to decline. The Crosy and Malkin contracts are reasonable. The Kovalchuk and Parise ones were/are not. And I felt that way (and communicated it) long before we lost both guys. 

 

This.  Overpaying for superstars is one thing.  But when you sign contracts that could cripple your team, that isn't a good thing.  The Kovalchuk contract would have crippled the Devils.  The new CBA basically makes it so teams aren't bent over by player trying to sign these crippling contracts.  Under the new CBA, contracts are now reasonable.  Even baseball contracts where there is no cap don't ever approach these ridiculous terms some of these NHL contracts are.  10 year contracts were pretty much the norm under the old CBA for just good players.  You rarely ever see 10 year contracts in baseball except for the absolutely elite players.  NHL owners wanted these contracts gone and for good reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with paying for a Ferrari is that often it stops being a Ferrari once you pay for it - Kovalchuk is a prime example, his goal scoring rates in all sense plummeted once he got to New Jersey.  The Devils as they are now can handle some long-term contracts, even though both Zajac and Clowe look like potential disasters, but the Kovalchuk contract was going to be particularly miserable - $11M for several more years, then cap recapture on the end - not that cap recapture should matter, but when the league locks out again in 7 years and we go through another year like this, the Devils should be right up near the cap again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is ridiculous. Throw the contract out, we're a better team with Kovalchuk on it. I'm over him leaving. The fact is, we don't know the reasoning, we don't know the concrete facts behind his leaving. He's gone and he'll be back in the NHL again someday. Whether its with us or with another team, I don't care, but to try to find excuses or say we're better off without him is ludicrous. The only area his departure helps is with regards to the cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are overreacting a bit with contracts i find. I mean its like they'll use it as a closure to convince themselves that its for the best and that its better to have no stars at all than to overpay one.

Kovy gone...oh well his contract was horrible!!!

Zach is gone... Well i wouldnt want that contract...

Clarkson.. Etc etc...

I mean... You guys think the ducks "want" getzlaf or perry's contract? Pens fans want crosby or malkin contract? Nashville want shea's contract etc etc. toews and kane next contract? Im sure hawks fans are not looking forward to that. All of those contracts will look bad at some point or course. Most top players has a big and long contract, thats the reality, you want to drive a ferrari? Well guess what youll have the payments that goes with it.

Dont get me wrong, having bad contracts sucks. But you wont get an impact player for cheap in this league, so you have to suck it up.

 

The difference is that Kovy's and Zach's contracts were crazy and horrible the day each one was signed.  15 years?  13 years?  That's insanity.  Getzalf's and Perry's contracts are a lot more reasonable, as far as length goes...8 years each. 

 

A lot of Devils fans weren't thrilled with Kovy coming back to begin with (I was one of them), especially when signed for first 17 years, then 15 years, and all of the nonsense that went along with getting him re-signed in the first place was annoying as hell.  Yeah, once he stayed, people who were initially against it decided they might as well back him...as far as we knew at the time, he was going to be a Devil for many years...might as well embrace him.  And to his credit, though I think he wasn't particulary comfortable doing it, he did allow himself to be coached into being a different kind of player.  But I think, when he went back home and played for SKA, a lot of things probably dawned on him...one of those things being that being the "complete" kind of player the Devils wanted him to be simply didn't suit him.  The trade that brought him to the Devils was a no-brainer, especially with what the Devils gave up, and he filled a glaring need at the time, but though he did some terrific things in 2011-12, I don't think it was ever a great fit, for either the Devils OR Kovy, though again, I do firmly believe that Kovy did try pretty hard to make it work.  And I don't think that Kovy wondering if he was ever going to be truly happy playing hockey the Devils' way was going to change, so yeah, for that and a whole lot of other reasons, I think the Devils getting out from underneath that contract was a good thing. 

 

The problem with your mentality is that you play GM out of fear of the unknown, and when the big names come up for UFA, you seem to think the GM should just ante up and pay.  Your Ferrari analogy is off, in that you're not buying new.  You're buying used.  The problem with paying top dollar for many of these UFAs is that you're paying them for what they WERE...not what they ARE.  Might Zach have 3-5 years of good hockey left in him?  Sure.  3-5 years out of 13 is a pretty lousy investment though, and as we've seen, a lot of long-term "this is our guy" contracts turn out to be lousy investments a lot more quickly than planned.   

 

I don't think Zach or Clarkson should've been re-signed to the money they received from both Minnesota and Toronto.  I think both contracts were typical UFA overpayments.  I know, you'll fire back with "Well why doesn't Lou ever talk with guys in-season, he could've signed those guys for less, why doesn't Lou just always make the right decision 100% of time, blah blah blah"  No GM makes all of the right decisions all of the time, and sometimes it takes years before one can truly evaluate whether or not any given decision was the correct one.  Right this second, I think letting Clarkson go was the right move (and even if Clarkson somehow lives up to his deal, I can still understand why Lou said "No thanks, adios." at the time).  I think signing Clowe probably wasn't.  But time will tell.     

 

Like I and others have said, re-signing a top UFA to a massive overpayment based on what were likely his best years is not the way to go.  Yes, it sucks and can hurt to see a guy you grow attached to leave.  Yes, when you're firmly in contention or trying to stay there, and trading a UFA in-season will likely hurt that team's chances come playoff time, it can suck to lose those players without getting anything in return.  The ideal way to stay on top is to have a solid AHL pipeline where guys can keep coming in to replace what was lost.  No, you won't often be blessed with carbon copies of what you lose, but hopefully the new players can either approximate what was lost, or lead to an adjustment in the system that allows the both the new bodies and the team to continue to be successful, albeit in a different way than before.   

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Colo i won't get in another debate with you but i'll just say that once again you're wrong about what you "assume" im thinking. Absolutely ridiculous to say that i expect Lou to be 100% perfect all the time, absolutely ridiculous. I never ever even mentioned anything close to that. 

 

as for the whole contract thing i was again talking general about some quotes from guys here about guys or teams all around the league. Not saying i dont agree, i didnt like Kovy's contract and i wouldnt want Zach contract either, but i don't put extra gravy saying it was the worst thing in the world either and that we're better off now with a bunch of plugs, how can anyone in their right mind say that we're a better team without Zach and Kovy. Thats what im talking about. The mentality of "im better off living on the street with only my clothes and toothbrush than overpaying a little for a good apartment. Some are exaggerating. There's a fine line but there's a difference in (for example) the Leafs overpaying for a guy like Clarkson when their team we're pretty fine without it) than overpaying for a guy who would be "your guy".

 

Plus bunch of teams that guys around here we're saying we're doomed are all fine now that they can use their buyouts to get rid of those contracts. There's always problems that you can try to get the best out in the present and deal with the problems in the future if you're lucky. Of course teams like Philly will never have a clue and they are indeed doomed. 

Edited by SterioDesign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Kovalchuk was paid $11M a year.  If money is no object to the Devils, you're right, they're better off with Kovalchuk.  If the Devils have a budget, they're not, because there's just no way Kovalchuk was worth $11M to a team limited to spending, say, $65M.  Basically pick 3 of Jagr, Brunner, Zidlicky, Ryder, Clowe - that's what the Devils would've been paying to Kovalchuk.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Kovalchuk was paid $11M a year.  If money is no object to the Devils, you're right, they're better off with Kovalchuk.  If the Devils have a budget, they're not, because there's just no way Kovalchuk was worth $11M to a team limited to spending, say, $65M.  Basically pick 3 of Jagr, Brunner, Zidlicky, Ryder, Clowe - that's what the Devils would've been paying to Kovalchuk.

 

Thats true but you have to look at it as a whole and the structure of your team. I'm gonna talk general here, i feel some teams can live through an overpaid player in his big salary years or even if you want to see it has his cap hit value IF you have some good "deals" on the team that is "money wize" compensating. Like Sykora at 650k scoring 21 goals or a young superstar producing but still getting entry level contract money or guys popping out of the blues producing or playing big minutes. 

 

The Pens for example are able to survive with or without Malkin and Crosby (and their contracts) cause they have a bunch of "deals" on the team at this moment.

 

Of course it's not ideal and you don't want bad contracts but again it's not as deadly as some are making it to be sometimes. There's ways around it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

as for the whole contract thing i was again talking general about some quotes from guys here about guys or teams all around the league. Not saying i dont agree, i didnt like Kovy's contract and i wouldnt want Zach contract either, but i don't put extra gravy saying it was the worst thing in the world either and that we're better off now with a bunch of plugs, how can anyone in their right mind say that we're a better team without Zach and Kovy. Thats what im talking about. The mentality of "im better off living on the street with only my clothes and toothbrush than overpaying a little for a good apartment. Some are exaggerating. There's a fine line but there's a difference in (for example) the Leafs overpaying for a guy like Clarkson when their team we're pretty fine without it) than overpaying for a guy who would be "your guy".

 

 

But signing Clarkson, Parise, or Kovalcuk at the rate they were/are paid is like buying a place in Trump Towers, only to be broke with a toothbrush in 5 or 10 years when you could suck it up and get a place on a safe block in Harlem. Sure, it's not as good. Less parking, less public transportation, smaller place, but in 10 years, you'll at least still have that, and if you're lucky and smart, you might even have a nice place in the Village because you were able to save a little money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But signing Clarkson, Parise, or Kovalcuk at the rate they were/are paid is like buying a place in Trump Towers, only to be broke with a toothbrush in 5 or 10 years when you could suck it up and get a place on a safe block in Harlem. Sure, it's not as good. Less parking, less public transportation, smaller place, but in 10 years, you'll at least still have that, and if you're lucky and smart, you might even have a nice place in the Village because you were able to save a little money.

 

You don't win cup living in Harlem though lol but again i was talking general, there's no way i'd want those 3 contracts now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't win cup living in Harlem though lol but again i was talking general, there's no way i'd want those 3 contracts now.

out of all 3 of those contracts o really wish something would've worked ot with parise but on the back of his kind I think he was planning on dogging is all along

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

out of all 3 of those contracts o really wish something would've worked ot with parise but on the back of his kind I think he was planning on dogging is all along

 

I dont think it was his plan all along, must have been in the back of his mind but i really think he wanted to stay in NJ, why would he ask Sutter to sign in NJ if he wanted to leave?

 

He said himself in an interview 2 years before that if a free agent gets to 1 month or wtv before free agency, why not wait to see whats out there? And well we gave him exactly that opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats true but you have to look at it as a whole and the structure of your team. I'm gonna talk general here, i feel some teams can live through an overpaid player in his big salary years or even if you want to see it has his cap hit value IF you have some good "deals" on the team that is "money wize" compensating. Like Sykora at 650k scoring 21 goals or a young superstar producing but still getting entry level contract money or guys popping out of the blues producing or playing big minutes. 

 

The Pens for example are able to survive with or without Malkin and Crosby (and their contracts) cause they have a bunch of "deals" on the team at this moment.

 

Of course it's not ideal and you don't want bad contracts but again it's not as deadly as some are making it to be sometimes. There's ways around it.

 

The Penguins would be a good team without Malkin, but they'd be in trouble without Crosby - Crosby is far and away the best player in the league.  Regardless, those contracts are much much much better than Ilya Kovalchuk's contract, because Ilya Kovalchuk was not as good or close to as good as those players.  The issue is with Kovalchuk's 'stardom' - somehow he is this giant star who is unable to produce even close to the numbers of star players 2 of the 3 years he was here.

 

The Devils' top scorer makes $2M on the cap this year and his bonuses may run the Devils over the cap.  Their top scoring defenseman is being paid $3M, and is in the same spot.  They've got Gelinas who is producing a ridiculous shot rate early on, he's providing a ton of value.  Larsson is too.  Reid Boucher is in the minors putting up great shot stats, he should be in the NHL next year, along with Gelinas on a cheap contract, perhaps Merrill as well.  The Devils have some entry-level bargains coming.  It's much much easier to build a team when your superstar player that you picked 1st overall has a dumb fixation with his birthdate that translates to a favorable cap hit.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Penguins would be a good team without Malkin, but they'd be in trouble without Crosby - Crosby is far and away the best player in the league.  Regardless, those contracts are much much much better than Ilya Kovalchuk's contract, because Ilya Kovalchuk was not as good or close to as good as those players.  The issue is with Kovalchuk's 'stardom' - somehow he is this giant star who is unable to produce even close to the numbers of star players 2 of the 3 years he was here.

 

The Devils' top scorer makes $2M on the cap this year and his bonuses may run the Devils over the cap.  Their top scoring defenseman is being paid $3M, and is in the same spot.  They've got Gelinas who is producing a ridiculous shot rate early on, he's providing a ton of value.  Larsson is too.  Reid Boucher is in the minors putting up great shot stats, he should be in the NHL next year, along with Gelinas on a cheap contract, perhaps Merrill as well.  The Devils have some entry-level bargains coming.  It's much much easier to build a team when your superstar player that you picked 1st overall has a dumb fixation with his birthdate that translates to a favorable cap hit.

 

i somewhat agree that Malkin is better but is he "2millions per year better"? not sure.

 

And Crosby who may be a hit away from being a catastrophe and i mean, i remember you saying that it was fine not to re-sign zach long term the first summer was that he was just coming back from a knee injury and that it was too risky. But Crosby's concussion problem is not to worry going forward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i somewhat agree that Malkin is better but is he "2millions per year better"? not sure.

 

And Crosby who may be a hit away from being a catastrophe and i mean, i remember you saying that it was fine not to re-sign zach long term the first summer was that he was just coming back from a knee injury and that it was too risky. But Crosby's concussion problem is not to worry going forward?

Of course it is, but he's so fvcking good that you take that risk. And plus, you'd think if teams insure contracts, that's gotta be one the Pens insured.

And the reason why the Pens have guys on "deals" as you put it, is because Crosby and Malkin can make guys like Dupuis better. Same with Kunitz. These guys are like Sykora and Clarkson were for us, in that they would not have had nearly the success they did had it not been for another player giving them the time, space and excellent passes to put up points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0