Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
DevsFan7545

New Kovy Update ("As the Kovy Turns")

12,307 posts in this topic

I'm encouraged by Lou's statement that they plan to work on a new deal. Still, it wouldn't shock me if Lou decides to fall on his sword and say something like the deal we agreed to is the only one that could have worked for us, and that we wish Kovy the best. Or the hockey version of, "It's me, not you". Grossman is a fairly powerful agent that you don't want to upset for the long term by throwing his client under a bus. Ultimately though, I think a deal gets done, and hopefully soon.

I know. See now i get to say THANK GOODNESS you tried to keep our hopes down. Now we can read your posts, confident of their rationale, and feel a little more optimistic. :giggle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am alittle behind on this, but have followed what is and has been going on, and am just curious as to the reasoning behind the arbvitrators decision? I read the blurb on NHL.com and all it says is Bloch agreed the NHL was within its rights to reject the deal????

I am not naive, and totally beleive that the players association brought up several of the "questionable" deals over the last few years that were allowed to stand, and with those deals being let go what LEG could the NHL and the arbitrator possiblyt stand on in this decision??

While I feel pretty good that the Devils will still get a deal done with Kovalchuk, I am greatly disapointed in this ruling as I am sure many are here. I am just wondering how if any way can one get an email or some sort of letter to the NHL to voice their displeasure over this? I looked online and can not find any way to contact the NHL front offices and am hoping someone here can give an email address or some way to do this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm encouraged by Lou's statement that they plan to work on a new deal. Still, it wouldn't shock me if Lou decides to fall on his sword and say something like the deal we agreed to is the only one that could have worked for us, and that we wish Kovy the best. Or the hockey version of, "It's me, not you". Grossman is a fairly powerful agent that you don't want to upset for the long term by throwing his client under a bus. Ultimately though, I think a deal gets done, and hopefully soon.

grossman isn't that powerful and lou already employs 2 of his clients.

the excerpts from the sporting news seem to indicate that bloch bought the argument about the 'intent' of the contract. that's a nebulous clause but its existence alone is what kept this deal from happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the excerpts from the sporting news seem to indicate that bloch bought the argument about the 'intent' of the contract. that's a nebulous clause but its existence alone is what kept this deal from happening.

I'm wondering, now that the league has its precedent, if it'll shoot down even something that's the exact same thing as the Hossa deal. We all know that all of these deals are retirement contracts. Unless there's some sort of smoking gun evidence that shows the Devils and/or Kovy actually believed he wouldn't play out the remainder of the deal, Bloch seems to have based his ruling on some objective standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am Lou, the problem i have with this ruling is that Luongo's contract takes him to 43, Pronger to 42, Hossa to 42.

If i wanted to make Bettman look really bad, I subtract a yr, keep the same terms and get it done.

If Bettman has the balls to go after him again...... i think the devils have a real battle on there hands legally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently, only one player in the League has played past 43

Well, that's incorrect. Gordie Howe and Chris Chelios both played past 43. Unless the "currently" is meant to refer to active players. If so, that's kind of a strange way to put it. Just nitpicking, but still, lol

As for penalties, it doesn't make sense to me how the Devils could get fined, considering they technically didn't have any recourse once the contract was rejected, per the CBA. It was the NHLPA that would have to file the protest, not the team. Obviously the Devils would be on the players' side, being in favor of the protest and having the rejection overturned. But, I dunno, just doesn't seem to add up, and hopefully the NHL will think so too. Unless I'm missing something(quite possible).

Edited by ClarkyDano23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

puts my mind at ease a bit that contract discussions have resumed...maybe there is a plan B.

Edited by '7'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am Lou, the problem i have with this ruling is that Luongo's contract takes him to 43

Technically, Luongo's contract that takes him to 43 hasn't started yet. Could the league retroactively reject it with Bloch's ruling in hand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering, now that the league has its precedent, if it'll shoot down even something that's the exact same thing as the Hossa deal. We all know that all of these deals are retirement contracts. Unless there's some sort of smoking gun evidence that shows the Devils and/or Kovy actually believed he wouldn't play out the remainder of the deal, Bloch seems to have based his ruling on some objective standard.

they might but...would the league want to drag the Devils into court AGAIN this late in the game. I mean the NHL looks bad already...would they really want to fight this battle again perhaps with different NHLPA lawyers and a different arbitrator?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Lou - glad he raised the no one acted in bad faith, nor were they found to issue. I felt that same way - the press conference was a major show it was not negotiated in bad faith as well - :unsure: I think I even wrote that already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am alittle behind on this, but have followed what is and has been going on, and am just curious as to the reasoning behind the arbvitrators decision? I read the blurb on NHL.com and all it says is Bloch agreed the NHL was within its rights to reject the deal????

I am not naive, and totally beleive that the players association brought up several of the "questionable" deals over the last few years that were allowed to stand, and with those deals being let go what LEG could the NHL and the arbitrator possiblyt stand on in this decision??

While I feel pretty good that the Devils will still get a deal done with Kovalchuk, I am greatly disapointed in this ruling as I am sure many are here. I am just wondering how if any way can one get an email or some sort of letter to the NHL to voice their displeasure over this? I looked online and can not find any way to contact the NHL front offices and am hoping someone here can give an email address or some way to do this!

I'm not disappointed by the ruling. I'm a little surprised. You have to give them more than an hour to do their work before you can decide on their motivation. You can't go from "WE SCREWED YOU!" to "CONSPIRACY!" in 3 seconds.

the Devils made their bed in this case by signing this deal and having a dog and pony show, when the league had told them where this was going. they put themselves out on an island and put their faith in the PA. don't know that they had any other choice, but it wasn't a good one.

the ranting, IMO, is a little juvenile. everyone knew what the process was going to entail. and if the shoe was on the other foot, and this was the Rangers, you'd all be dancing in the streets and saying "FINALLY, AN END TO THIS MADNESS!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am Lou, the problem i have with this ruling is that Luongo's contract takes him to 43, Pronger to 42, Hossa to 42.

If i wanted to make Bettman look really bad, I subtract a yr, keep the same terms and get it done.

If Bettman has the balls to go after him again...... i think the devils have a real battle on there hands legally.

No because it's the fact they're paying next to nothing in those last years -- it means he wont be playing. he can afford to throw away that money and the Devils can afford to pay it to an aged vet who doesn't know when to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they might but...would the league want to drag the Devils into court AGAIN this late in the game. I mean the NHL looks bad already...would they really want to fight this battle again perhaps with different NHLPA lawyers and a different arbitrator?

why not? they've already won and another win would give them a bigger hammer. they can't lose what they already have. also, they get to look forgiving by not handing out a punishment. the second time, they don't have to be so forgiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

puts my mind at ease a bit that contract discussions have resumed...maybe there is a plan B.

This is Lou bro... you better believe there's a plan B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever any of you posters are thinking about now, Lou already knew months ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real question -- does this thread go on until Kovy signs somewhere... :evilcry: I can't say uncle! i won't ... but this is getting tiresome!

I'm going camping August 21st - canoe in canoe out! No one will hike in hike out - but they will canoe in so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not disappointed by the ruling. I'm a little surprised. You have to give them more than an hour to do their work before you can decide on their motivation. You can't go from "WE SCREWED YOU!" to "CONSPIRACY!" in 3 seconds.

the Devils made their bed in this case by signing this deal and having a dog and pony show, when the league had told them where this was going. they put themselves out on an island and put their faith in the PA. don't know that they had any other choice, but it wasn't a good one.

the ranting, IMO, is a little juvenile. everyone knew what the process was going to entail. and if the shoe was on the other foot, and this was the Rangers, you'd all be dancing in the streets and saying "FINALLY, AN END TO THIS MADNESS!"

While Bloch certainly isn't a part of any conspiracy, I still stand by my (untestable) belief that if the Penguins, Rangers, Blackhawks, Flyers, etc. did the same deal, the league would not have rejected the deal. If the argument was that this was a retirement deal, then there's no reason why the league didn't challenge Hossa, Pronger, Luongo, other than preferring the teams they signed with. They're all retirement deals. It's a double standard, period.

Edited by Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is Lou bro... you better believe there's a plan B.

trouble is...sometimes plan B is Andreas Salomonsson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Bloch certainly isn't a part of any conspiracy, I still stand by my (untestable) belief that if the Penguins, Rangers, Blackhawks, Flyers, etc. did the same deal, the league would not have rejected the deal. If the argument was that this was a retirement deal, then there's no reason why the league didn't challenge Hossa, Pronger, Luongo, other than preferring the teams they signed with. They're all retirement deals. It's a double standard, period.

turns out they made the right decision. they waited for the ultimate in stupidity/cap greed. and they won. can always go back to the other ones later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

go get them Lou... give him time

gunnerlou.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And just to rub it in a little more...On the NHL Network bottom line of the broadcast of Game 6 vs. DAL, the first thing they show is "FA LW's" with Kovy's name leading the way, lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0