Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DevsFan7545

New Kovy Update ("As the Kovy Turns")

Recommended Posts

Incorrect. If the Devils are going for the throat, the argument will be geared towards prior precedent and the guidelines of the CBA as written first and foremost.

If the NHL wants to argue he won't be playing until he is 44, they are submitting an argument where there is no way they can predict that Kovalchuk can play to "X" age, and that includes even to age 40. The NHL will NOT win an age battle considering the ages of prior contracts singed by players who will be used as a basis of comparison.

A court of law does not rule on the "spirit" of a law. If that was the case, i can name 10 things i did today that violated a "spirit" of a law or rule and so can anyone here.

731, let me ask you. Not for nothing, but is there anything you are ever incorrect about or don't have an opinion on? You seem to fancy yourself as a bit of an expert on everything and come off as extremely contradicting.

Please tell me where "reasonable man" is so vastly different than the "spirit" you guys are talking about? A contract can be completely valid but if it violates the "reasonable man" concept the court can go ahead of void it. For example, you offer me 100 bucks for a baseball card and I sell it to you and you pay me. Legal contract. You know the card is worth a million dollars and I had come to you for your expertise in card value and the same deal happens, no valid contract, a reasonable man would not have made that deal if they had known it was worth a million bucks.

A contract can meet all the legal definitions of a contract and still be overturned, in this case the NHL is arguing the intent to play until 44 isn't there and it will take an arbiter to decide who is more correct. The arbiter won't just say, "We can't see the future, NHLPA wins!"

Why would the NHL definitely lose an age comparison with the NHLPA using a 42 year old and the league saying a 44 year old is different? The difference is so big it really makes the comparison fairly weak, IMO.

I'm not saying I'm an expert, I'm sharing the knowledge I do have, as you're trying to do with yours. Is discussing something such a problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"2)"

That's why Kovy was so sure to make the "I am keeping myself in shape to play to 44" comment

You know -- I loved how he deadpanned that. When I read it people said there was laughter... and there was in the crowd - but NONE from Kovalchuk. and I also believed him. I think it also helped that he DID joke about Lou convincing Marty to sign on for a few more years.

It's annoying because I really do believe this. I feel like Kovalchuk would love to play to 44. i think any guy would - but that start stinking so bad and then there is a pride issue. This is very real actually and takes care of any pride issues at that. You know he's playing out his contract and it's so cheap because you know - it was designed that way -- he's not GROVELING or anything. You can get a TON of guys to testify they'd be playing if anyone would have them in a non-humiliating way - starting with Shannahan!

But I also believed the DePietro one too and Millbury and Rick were laughing their asses off about it after the fact -- I was actually confused thinking... well -- doesn't he want to play out the full 12 years...

I'm such a naive dope sometimes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"2)"

That's why Kovy was so sure to make the "I am keeping myself in shape to play to 44" comment

But why does Lou then make the "eye rolling" and "these contracts shouldn't be allowed" comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lou, "The contract complies with the terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. We will have no further comment until the process outlined in the CBA is complete."

Linda Cohn: "Nobody is coming through with further comments." What is stranger the deal, 17 years, or that the fact Devils GM LL knew all about it, that about the NHL was going to reject this before the press conference."

EJ Hradek: "Yeah, yesterday seems like all but a dream. It seems LL knew as early as Monday night that the league would reject this deal. In fact, a couple of different sources told me, that when the league got rumblings of the Devils were thinking/dealing in a 15 and 17 year contract, the league reached out and stated they were going to scrutinize and probably reject it. Yet the Devils went forward with this unusual circumstance now."

EJ goes into NHLPA protest... "NHLPA Paul Kelly is gone and this grievance, but there's no arbitrator in place right now. So the league and NHLPA need to agree on one... and this could be several weeks of murky water."

EJ Hradek: "I don't see anything in the CBA that would violate this deal so favor goes to NJ/Kovy."

Edited by HOLLYWOOD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like Lou will be bringing the heat. Get 'er done Lou.

Sounds like to me Lou knows the NHLPA will file a grievance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It better be right that Lou informed Grossman before the press conference about what he knew. If he didn't do that, I would ask for his resignation immediately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this tweet, which points to my earlier post about them knowing it will get rejected vs the possibility:

TGfireandice

To clarify, Devs were aware deal would probably be rejected Mon night. NHL did not send official rejection letter until Tues. night half a minute ago via web

Edited by Marv4Life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the NHLPA will file a grievance. It's a huge case and they won't just bow down to the NHL...how would that look?

At least i think....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we knew it was going to be rejected then why have the press conference? Kinda embarrassing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It better be right that Lou informed Grossman before the press conference about what he knew. If he didn't do that, I would ask for his resignation immediately.

should the owners fire themselves after that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we knew it was going to be rejected then why have the press conference? Kinda embarrassing...

TG said they knew it was a possibility, not definite. There's a big difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TG said they knew it was a possibility, not definite. There's a big difference.

He only just clarified that now, a half hour after he was reporting the same thing ESPN is. I don't get these journalists, there's a big difference between could reject the deal and would reject the deal. Hundreds of internet posters here and elsewhere could do a better job than most of these hacks in the media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It better be right that Lou informed Grossman before the press conference about what he knew. If he didn't do that, I would ask for his resignation immediately.

Wait...why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell me where "reasonable man" is so vastly different than the "spirit" you guys are talking about? A contract can be completely valid but if it violates the "reasonable man" concept the court can go ahead of void it. For example, you offer me 100 bucks for a baseball card and I sell it to you and you pay me. Legal contract. You know the card is worth a million dollars and I had come to you for your expertise in card value and the same deal happens, no valid contract, a reasonable man would not have made that deal if they had known it was worth a million bucks.

Because you are trying to use the basis of a "reasonable man" when reason and logic is different among men and you are using your own judgement on who is or is not. A "reasonable man" is like trying to find the "perfect woman" or the "well behaved kid" in your own eyes. How do you judge reason, anyway? Reason is measured in many variables outside of right or wrong.

I was a card dealer for 10 years, bought and sold thousands upon thousands of dollars in cards. You can take a card to 5 dealers and 5 can give you a different price based on actual "value" in his opinion or his buying to resell to make a profit. Price guides are not bibles. Undervaluing a baseball card to a seller can be a court battle/crime if the seller claims duress, of not sound mind or body, threatened or if a minor is involved.

Normally, if anything, it's a real bad case of business ethics. If you're trying to prove it as a crime in a court of law, you're going to find it's alot different then screaming "he only gave me $100, knowing it was a million! I want justice!" Baseball card dealers or memorabilia dealers are not held to a legal code of bylaws, rules and jurisdiction within themselves as a business.

A contract can meet all the legal definitions of a contract and still be overturned, in this case the NHL is arguing the intent to play until 44 isn't there and it will take an arbiter to decide who is more correct. The arbiter won't just say, "We can't see the future, NHLPA wins!"

Why would the NHL definitely lose an age comparison with the NHLPA using a 42 year old and the league saying a 44 year old is different? The difference is so big it really makes the comparison fairly weak, IMO.

I'm not saying I'm an expert, I'm sharing the knowledge I do have, as you're trying to do with yours. Is discussing something such a problem?

For a legal contract to be overturned because one party thinks the other is acting in a way that is not "reasonable" or violates a "spirit" of a contract takes alot to prove and i would not bet on the side that's bring about those claims.

However, the problem is the NHL has made a huge mistake in forming a precedent by allowing contracts such as Pronger, Hossa, Luongo for starters. Now, they are trying to set another precedent to offset their own mistakes by using Kovalchuk's contract as a last straw until 2012.

The league is trying to save itself when it should have fought the prior contracts instead. It's another example of total mismanagement and judgement by the NHL and why it's still a garage league that continues to trip over itself on and off the ice.

Edited by SJP20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He only just clarified that now, a half hour after he was reporting the same thing ESPN is. I don't get these journalists, there's a big difference between could reject the deal and would reject the deal. Hundreds of internet posters here and elsewhere could do a better job than most of these hacks in the media.

It's ESPN, don't be shocked. 5th graders could do a better job than these clowns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

should the owners fire themselves after that?

My guess is that only vanderbeek would have been in the loop. He does not have a majority interest so other limited partners should have the ability to band together and vote or go to court and demand vanderbeek be stripped of management duties if he doesn't fire lou. Again, if it's true, and I invested a good chunk of change in a team that lou because of his ego let crash and burn, I would go to court to get him out of there if necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused by all of this...does this mean Kovy could be swiped by the Kings since the contract was rejected or is that part over with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Kovy's camp was not informed prior to the press conference then it would be seriously damaging to the organization. How will players/agents trust our management in the future? It will affect everything we do contract-wise while Lou remains at the helm. I hope we hear very soon that ALL parties were informed of the rejection (or possible rejection, which story turns out is true).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is that only vanderbeek would have been in the loop. He does not have a majority interest so other limited partners should have the ability to band together and vote or go to court and demand vanderbeek be stripped of management duties if he doesn't fire lou. Again, if it's true, and I invested a good chunk of change in a team that lou because of his ego let crash and burn, I would go to court to get him out of there if necessary.

i agree that a prolonged court battle that ends with vanderbeek being stripped of management duties and lou being fired would make the organization look a lot better.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is that only vanderbeek would have been in the loop. He does not have a majority interest so other limited partners should have the ability to band together and vote or go to court and demand vanderbeek be stripped of management duties if he doesn't fire lou. Again, if it's true, and I invested a good chunk of change in a team that lou because of his ego let crash and burn, I would go to court to get him out of there if necessary.

Spoken like a true moron :smilegah: I'm not refuting that's what you'd do -- nor what your typical investor non-hockey fan would do :evil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was this posted:

NHLPA source: "To get arbitrator in place for Kovalchuk case could take months. "The NHL n Devils/Kovalchuk need to do this on their own."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree that a prolonged court battle that ends with vanderbeek being stripped of management duties and lou being fired would make the organization look a lot better.

:giggle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are stating that should the NHLPA file a grievance, it might take months to find an arbiter that both sides agree on. If it goes longer than the start of the regular season, what happens?

Edited by Amberite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you are trying to use the basis of a "reasonable man" when reason and logic is different among men and you are using your own judgement on who is or is not. A "reasonable man" is like trying to find the "perfect woman" or the "well behaved kid" in your own eyes. How do you judge reason, anyway? Reason is measured in many variables outside of right or wrong.

I was a card dealer for 10 years, bought and sold thousands upon thousands of dollars in cards. You can take a card to 5 dealers and 5 can give you a different price based on actual "value" in his opinion or his buying to resell to make a profit. Price guides are not bibles. Undervaluing a baseball card to a seller can be a court battle/crime if the seller claims duress, of not sound mind or body, threatened or if a minor is involved.

Normally, if anything, it's a real bad case of business ethics. If you're trying to prove it as a crime in a court of law, you're going to find it's alot different then screaming "he only gave me $100, knowing it was a million! I want justice!" Baseball card dealers or memorabilia dealers are not held to a legal code of bylaws, rules and jurisdiction within themselves as a business.

For a legal contract to be overturned because one party thinks the other is acting in a way that is not "reasonable" or violates a "spirit" of a contract takes alot to prove and i would not bet on the side that's bring about those claims.

However, the problem is the NHL has made a huge mistake in forming a precedent by allowing contracts such as Pronger, Hossa, Luongo for starters. Now, they are trying to set another precedent to offset their own mistakes by using Kovalchuk's contract as a last straw until 2012.

The league is trying to save itself when it should have fought the prior contracts instead. It's another example of total mismanagement and judgement by the NHL and why it's still a garage league that continues to trip over itself on and off the ice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are stating that should the NHLPA file a grievance, it might take months to find an arbiter that both sides agree on. If it goes longer than the start of the regular season, what happens?

he's not eligible to play until it is resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×