SterioDesign Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 So we should try to win the cup, then it's like nothing ever happened Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSkirt Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 The rest of the league has every right to be going nuts. This is the third time Lou has really gotten away with some sketchy sh!t. I think they should be happy because we got all of the teams in the league that finish ahead of us this season to move up 1-slot in the Draft Order ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSkirt Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 For something like this winning the Cup is irrelevant. Boston is on that list and Vancouver is not, by virtue of one game. That has nothing to do with how well either team has drafted. Pittsburgh and Chicago are on that list largely by virtue of being bad at the right times. GM > Scouts ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils Pride 26 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 You're welcome, guys. It's my birthday - I asked for the pick back. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgb6397 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Don't know if this has been said yet, but to me, the biggest part of this pick is we can now justify the Matteau pick. I like him as a player, but Lou refusing to give up a 29th overall was one of the most boneheaded things he's done as a GM, up until today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So that means the SCF winner picks 29th? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Brown Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 If you disregard the poll results, and just read the replies, a lot of people are siding with the Devils. http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1619049 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Per Lebrun, if we miss the playoffs, we would still be in the lottery. If we won, the team that had the worst record, likely Buffalo, would move up to number 1, and so on. Seems like a really sick joke. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smelly Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I think today's development is a fair resolution of the whole Kovlchuk saga. Yes, the Devils arguably violated the spirit (and perhaps the letter) of the CBA cap rules, but they didn't do anything that numerous other teams hadn't already done. The league determined it had to put its foot down and decided to make the Devils the example (we can speculate as to why NJ ad nauseam). In any event, I'm not at all surprised that the penalty was lessened in this manner. To me, the most interesting comment that Lamoriello has ever made about the loss of the draft pick was last summer, when he expressly revealed that he wasn't worried and the team's attorneys were looking at the Devils' options. My read is that the league knew that even if the original penalty was upheld by the league arbitrator, Lamoriello and the Devils could make a real mess of things. How? First, challenge the ruling in arbitration. If you lose, wait until the eve of the draft and file a lawsuit and an application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction preventing the league from enforcing the penalty until the litigation was complete (have another donut!). Yes, it is VERY difficult to overturn an arbitrator's ruling in court (isn't that right, A-Rod)?, and it is likely that the Devils would have ultimately lost the lawsuit and the original penalty would have been upheld. BUT the damage for the NHL likely would have been severe, and may in fact have been catastrophic. How? Let's say the Devils get the injunction. Now all of a sudden they have a pick that according to the league's official position is invalid. The Devils make their pick, and the league is legally powerless to stop it. The other teams could theoretically challenge the validity of the draft. There could be uncertainty with EVERY subsequent selection after the Devils pick. And there is potentially a real mess if and when the NHL position were upheld by the court. Yes, the league could roll the penalty over until the next draft, but even then creative lawyers for any of the teams or draftees in either draft could make a lot of trouble if they wanted to. Moral of the story -- both sides recognized that it was in everybody's interest to do a deal. Throw in the fact that both Vanderbeek AND Kovalchuk are no longer with the franchise, and you have a nice cover story to "explain" or rationalize the modification (not that I think that this had nothing to do with the change -- but I don't believe for a second that it was the driving factor). So despite the bitching by some fans of other teams (even setting side the whole pot/kettle thing), this was a positive development for everyone. And, in my opinion, fair also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I don't know if you guys read it or it's been posted but the pick is non-transferable and non-tradable so even if we knew this would happen before the deadline we wouldn't have been able to offer the pick to anyone. I also read that ownership made the appeal, so it's possible that they had more to do with it than Lou. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazer Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) anyone think maybe this will relieve Matteau of any pressure he might have had on him due to criticism of his pick? edit: happy b day DP you deserve it redit:now that i think, matts doesnt play with much pressure in his game anyway and it was mostly, fanbased. Edited March 7, 2014 by lazer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I think today's development is a fair resolution of the whole Kovlchuk saga. Yes, the Devils arguably violated the spirit (and perhaps the letter) of the CBA cap rules, but they didn't do anything that numerous other teams hadn't already done. The league determined it had to put its foot down and decided to make the Devils the example (we can speculate as to why NJ ad nauseam). In any event, I'm not at all surprised that the penalty was lessened in this manner. To me, the most interesting comment that Lamoriello has ever made about the loss of the draft pick was last summer, when he expressly revealed that he wasn't worried and the team's attorneys were looking at the Devils' options. My read is that the league knew that even if the original penalty was upheld by the league arbitrator, Lamoriello and the Devils could make a real mess of things. How? First, challenge the ruling in arbitration. If you lose, wait until the eve of the draft and file a lawsuit and an application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction preventing the league from enforcing the penalty until the litigation was complete (have another donut!). Yes, it is VERY difficult to overturn an arbitrator's ruling in court (isn't that right, A-Rod)?, and it is likely that the Devils would have ultimately lost the lawsuit and the original penalty would have been upheld. BUT the damage for the NHL likely would have been severe, and may in fact have been catastrophic. How? Let's say the Devils get the injunction. Now all of a sudden they have a pick that according to the league's official position is invalid. The Devils make their pick, and the league is legally powerless to stop it. The other teams could theoretically challenge the validity of the draft. There could be uncertainty with EVERY subsequent selection after the Devils pick. And there is potentially a real mess if and when the NHL position were upheld by the court. Yes, the league could roll the penalty over until the next draft, but even then creative lawyers for any of the teams or draftees in either draft could make a lot of trouble if they wanted to. Moral of the story -- both sides recognized that it was in everybody's interest to do a deal. Throw in the fact that both Vanderbeek AND Kovalchuk are no longer with the franchise, and you have a nice cover story to "explain" or rationalize the modification (not that I think that this had nothing to do with the change -- but I don't believe for a second that it was the driving factor). So despite the bitching by some fans of other teams (even setting side the whole pot/kettle thing), this was a positive development for everyone. And, in my opinion, fair also. Fantastic post and some great points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucifersDog Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 http://blogs.northjersey.com/blogs/fireice Owners made the appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I think they should be happy because we got all of the teams in the league that finish ahead of us this season to move up 1-slot in the Draft Order ! Those picks aren't affected by our pick being given back because without the Devils having a first round pick, there was only going to be 29 picks, so nobody is moving up here. Those first 29 picks remain the same, and every pick of the draft starting with the beginning of the second round is now pushed back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) I think today's development is a fair resolution of the whole Kovlchuk saga. Yes, the Devils arguably violated the spirit (and perhaps the letter) of the CBA cap rules, but they didn't do anything that numerous other teams hadn't already done. The league determined it had to put its foot down and decided to make the Devils the example (we can speculate as to why NJ ad nauseam). In any event, I'm not at all surprised that the penalty was lessened in this manner. To me, the most interesting comment that Lamoriello has ever made about the loss of the draft pick was last summer, when he expressly revealed that he wasn't worried and the team's attorneys were looking at the Devils' options. My read is that the league knew that even if the original penalty was upheld by the league arbitrator, Lamoriello and the Devils could make a real mess of things. How? First, challenge the ruling in arbitration. If you lose, wait until the eve of the draft and file a lawsuit and an application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction preventing the league from enforcing the penalty until the litigation was complete (have another donut!). Yes, it is VERY difficult to overturn an arbitrator's ruling in court (isn't that right, A-Rod)?, and it is likely that the Devils would have ultimately lost the lawsuit and the original penalty would have been upheld. BUT the damage for the NHL likely would have been severe, and may in fact have been catastrophic. How? Let's say the Devils get the injunction. Now all of a sudden they have a pick that according to the league's official position is invalid. The Devils make their pick, and the league is legally powerless to stop it. The other teams could theoretically challenge the validity of the draft. There could be uncertainty with EVERY subsequent selection after the Devils pick. And there is potentially a real mess if and when the NHL position were upheld by the court. Yes, the league could roll the penalty over until the next draft, but even then creative lawyers for any of the teams or draftees in either draft could make a lot of trouble if they wanted to. Moral of the story -- both sides recognized that it was in everybody's interest to do a deal. Throw in the fact that both Vanderbeek AND Kovalchuk are no longer with the franchise, and you have a nice cover story to "explain" or rationalize the modification (not that I think that this had nothing to do with the change -- but I don't believe for a second that it was the driving factor). So despite the bitching by some fans of other teams (even setting side the whole pot/kettle thing), this was a positive development for everyone. And, in my opinion, fair also. This wouldn't work for several reasons. In the bylaws there is a provision that if you challenge a league ruling in court you face enormous penalties. That comes from when the Devils got an injunction against Schoenfeld being suspended in the 88 playoffs. There's also a legal principle called laches which prevents you from intentionally sitting on your rights to the detriment of your adversary, which is what delaying a law suit until the eve of the draft would be. Ultimately, I think it came down to the new ownership making the case that hockey in NJ can only work if the team is competitive. Despite our conspiracy theories, the league wants all of its teams to be profitable and play to large crowds. Addendum: there's also a misconception about temporary injunctions that courts just dole them out upon request. You would have to show a likelihood of success on the merits, which the Devils' attorneys could get sanctioned for arguing existed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited March 7, 2014 by Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Per Lebrun, if we miss the playoffs, we would still be in the lottery. If we won, the team that had the worst record, likely Buffalo, would move up to number 1, and so on. Seems like a really sick joke. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pretty much guarantees a lottery win, I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Now that we've got 30th pick we need to win the Stanley Cup this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smelly Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 This wouldn't work for several reasons. In the bylaws there is a provision that if you challenge a league ruling in court you face enormous penalties. That comes from when the Devils got an injunction against Schoenfeld being suspended in the 88 playoffs. There's also a legal principle called laches which prevents you from intentionally sitting on your rights to the detriment of your adversary, which is what delaying a law suit until the eve of the draft would be. Ultimately, I think it came down to the new ownership making the case that hockey in NJ can only work if the team is competitive. Despite our conspiracy theories, the league wants all of its teams to be profitable and play to large crowds. Addendum: there's also a misconception about temporary injunctions that courts just dole them out upon request. You would have to show a likelihood of success on the merits, which the Devils' attorneys could get sanctioned for arguing existed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Remember, it's the threat that counts here. Notwithstanding the bylaw provision, there is nothing that would prevent the Devils from advising the league that they would go forward with litigation and challenge the bylaw as unconscionable and unenforceable. A tough argument ultimately to succeed on, but in a game of bluff-calling all bets are off. As for laches, whether the litigation were so unreasonably delayed such that it should be equitably barred would depend on the facts, and I believe your assumption is too facile here. The arbitration was in January -- waiting five or six months to file would not presumptively be improper under NJ law. Also, even if you filed the lawsuit immediately after the arbitration decision, the PI application need not necessarily be filed and/or decided immediately -- and could plausibly be argued to be premature if brought at that time. Finally, although likelihood of success is an element of a TRO/PI ruling, we all know that as a practical matter where there is a strong case for irreparable harm (one of the other elements of the test) many courts (state courts in particular) apply a somewhat relaxed standard for likelihood of success (even if they don't admit as much). I strongly disagree that the Devils attorneys would be remotely exposed to sanctions for filing such an application, especially if they included a challenge to the bylaw itself. Judges are loathe to impose sanctions for anything other than the most egregious conduct, and this certainly would not rise to that level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) smelly v daniel (dum dum) (law and order bells) i was desperately looking for lawyerfight.gif but could not find. Edited March 7, 2014 by sundstrom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Hockey Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) I think it came down to the new ownership making the case that hockey in NJ can only work if the team is competitive. Despite our conspiracy theories, the league wants all of its teams to be profitable and play to large crowds. A 30th pick in the draft isn't going to determine whether or not the team is competitive though. Edited March 7, 2014 by Satans Hockey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Remember, it's the threat that counts here. Notwithstanding the bylaw provision, there is nothing that would prevent the Devils from advising the league that they would go forward with litigation and challenge the bylaw as unconscionable and unenforceable. A tough argument ultimately to succeed on, but in a game of bluff-calling all bets are off. As for laches, whether the litigation were so unreasonably delayed such that it should be equitably barred would depend on the facts, and I believe your assumption is too facile here. The arbitration was in January -- waiting five or six months to file would not presumptively be improper under NJ law. Also, even if you filed the lawsuit immediately after the arbitration decision, the PI application need not necessarily be filed and/or decided immediately -- and could plausibly be argued to be premature if brought at that time. Finally, although likelihood of success is an element of a TRO/PI ruling, we all know that as a practical matter where there is a strong case for irreparable harm (one of the other elements of the test) many courts (state courts in particular) apply a somewhat relaxed standard for likelihood of success (even if they don't admit as much). I strongly disagree that the Devils attorneys would be remotely exposed to sanctions for filing such an application, especially if they included a challenge to the bylaw itself. Judges are loathe to impose sanctions for anything other than the most egregious conduct, and this certainly would not rise to that level. The penalty came down three years ago. There was no "arbitration" in January. It was the Devils making a case to the league. Yeah, some judges do weird things on occasion, but a judge is ultimately going to look at your papers, and ask why you waited three years to challenge this penalty, and why are you asking me to issue an emergency injunction that you could have sought years ago, or at least a few weeks ago, where this could have been decided on the merits ahead of time. Ultimately we're talking about a draft pick in a hockey league. It's not a case of a company that's about to go out of business, or a person that's going to be taken off of life support. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smelly Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 The penalty came down three years ago. There was no "arbitration" in January. It was the Devils making a case to the league. Yeah, some judges do weird things on occasion, but a judge is ultimately going to look at your papers, and ask why you waited three years to challenge this penalty, and why are you asking me to issue an emergency injunction that you could have sought years ago, or at least a few weeks ago, where this could have been decided on the merits ahead of time. Ultimately we're talking about a draft pick in a hockey league. It's not a case of a company that's about to go out of business, or a person that's going to be taken off of life support. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I've seen injunctions issued in situations that are a far cry from the situations you cite. And if you want to take your chances on that argument in Chancery, go right ahead. Given all the hell it could raise, I'm not sure the NHL would roll the dice that some judge in Chancery wouldn't issue a TRO and make a mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 A 30th pick in the draft isn't going to determine whether or not the team is competitive though. Except when its Kesler or Weber, etc. Even the number 1 pick doesn't necessarily make you competitive. It just helps not to have the pick taken away wholesale. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I've seen injunctions issued in situations that are a far cry from the situations you cite. And if you want to take your chances on that argument in Chancery, go right ahead. Given all the hell it could raise, I'm not sure the NHL would roll the dice that some judge in Chancery wouldn't issue a TRO and make a mess. Believe me, the NHL and its lawyers at Proskauer, Skadden or wherever would not be intimidated. The same way that MLB was not scared off by Arod's legal team and it's threats if injunctions. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 smelly v daniel (dum dum) (law and order bells) i was desperately looking for lawyerfight.gif but could not find. 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.