10 Reasons To Keep Kovy

[ZeroGravityFat]

there is a very simple argument for signing kovi, this team let us down for 3 years, and i will not believe we have made any changes unless we make an impact signing this off-season, and i'm the die hard fan. so for people less into the devils than myself, the lack of change will equal lack of care, hence lack of full seats. so like it or not, we need kovi and some hard nosed defender who will dish out some career ending injuries in order to pick up the sales to what it was towards the end of the season.

[Neb00rs]

First off, stop with the whole apologist "Kovy was a Thrasher only four months ago, so he gets a a bit of a pass on what he did here" angle. Lou made this deal thinking he could help NOW, impact NOW, this was a NOW deal, not a "let him get used to us and then he'll be better next season and the season(s) beyond deal" (I'll always feel that bringing Ilya in was a risk worth taking, regardless of the outcome). Lou knew there was a good chance he wouldn't be coming back here.

In bold: there you go. Blindly looking at stats. Do you really think he was good in the playoffs? Even Triumph admitted in another thread that Kovalchuk didn't have a good playoff. Wow, he scored an ENG goal and a 5-on-3 PPG in five GP. That's awesome stuff. Did he really impact the team that much during the regular season? Because I didn't see that either...not positively, anyway.

I have no idea how good he might be if he stays here (no one here can predict that), but at least my prognosis isn't based almost 100% on sunshiney perfect-case scenarios. I saw enough bad play and shakiness out of Kovalchuk in the time he was here that I'd be very concerned about coughing up big cash and several years to keep him, and are you going to continue to ignore the fact that his motivation has been called into question in Atlanta? I said this a long time ago, but he reminds me of a second-year player who has tremendous upside and is very raw. The problem is he's been in the NHL for several years now.

You wrote all this forgetting my previous posts. I never said Kovy had a good playoffs. As I've said: Kovy struggled here and did not fulfill expectations. Sure he had 6 points in the playoffs but he didn't score any needed goals. We expected to get more out of Kovy and I don't give him a pass. All I'm saying is that now that we are eliminated and looking at the long term we need to see how things will changee if Kovy stays on this team. you're not saying he was just bad for this season, you keep making the argument that he will never work out in NJ. Now that we are looking long-term, it's fair to look back in retrospect and say, "maybe the 3 months Kovy played for us wasn't the whole story. He'll be better in the future seeing that he was a point a game guy right away without a center." You guys continue to act like Kovy will always play like a Thrasher when he has only been off that team for a little while.

As for his motivation, now your playing of of media hype. Kovy stuck with that team through traigc circumstances. The Thrashers were just developing when tragedy made them fall apart. Management has never been able to regroup that team. Just now, they're coming out of it. I am not basing anything on perfect-case scenarios either. I didn't say he comes out a completely new player next season. The point you are missing is that: if Kovy doesn't work out we're not screwed. He is easily tradeable.

[Jerrydevil]

Benoors, you clearly want to absolve Kovalchuk from any blame for why the Thrashers usually stunk, and I think that's letting the big Russian off easy.

[NJDevs26]

The point you are missing is that: if Kovy doesn't work out we're not screwed. He is easily tradeable.

Not if you sign him to some 8 year, $80 million contract that only a handful of teams can afford on both their budget and the cap. If you think he's going to sign for peanuts you're mistaken, salary plays into whether he's tradeable or not, as does whether we have to give him a NMC.

[DaneykoIsGod]

The point you are missing is that: if Kovy doesn't work out we're not screwed. He is easily tradeable.

If a free agent signing doesn't work, it's not like his market value automatically reverts to whatever it was immediately before the signing. If that was the case, old Dorn woulda been shipped out a long, long time ago.

[Triumph]

First off, stop with the whole apologist "Kovy was a Thrasher only four months ago, so he gets a a bit of a pass on what he did here" angle. Lou made this deal thinking he could help NOW, impact NOW, this was a NOW deal, not a "let him get used to us and then he'll be better next season and the season(s) beyond deal" (I'll always feel that bringing Ilya in was a risk worth taking, regardless of the outcome). Lou knew there was a good chance he wouldn't be coming back here.

In bold: there you go. Blindly looking at stats. Do you really think he was good in the playoffs? Even Triumph admitted in another thread that Kovalchuk didn't have a good playoff. Wow, he scored an ENG goal and a 5-on-3 PPG in five GP. That's awesome stuff. Did he really impact the team that much during the regular season? Because I didn't see that either...not positively, anyway.

I have no idea how good he might be if he stays here (no one here can predict that), but at least my prognosis isn't based almost 100% on sunshiney perfect-case scenarios. I saw enough bad play and shakiness out of Kovalchuk in the time he was here that I'd be very concerned about coughing up big cash and several years to keep him, and are you going to continue to ignore the fact that his motivation has been called into question in Atlanta? I said this a long time ago, but he reminds me of a second-year player who has tremendous upside and is very raw. The problem is he's been in the NHL for several years now.

this conversation is going to come out weird and i may be making points that ben00rs has made already. figure it out.

those atlanta teams were, for the most part, awful. and they are awful in part because i suspect that management there was eager to please kovalchuk, so they didn't install any kind of defensive system or anything. so in that sense, kovalchuk can be blamed. however, kovalchuk is a left wing, his defensive play isn't going to make or break a team - how many goals do you really think that kovalchuk can be responsible for? so let's look at atlanta's goals against since kovalchuk came on to the team.

2008-09: 29th

2007-08: 30th

2006-07: 14th

2005-06: 24th

2003-04: 25th

2002-03: 30th

2001-02: 30th

there you go. atlanta has consistently been awful at not allowing goals. only in one season did they even come close to being average (and were actually above-average). that happens to be the year they made the playoffs. should we look at atlanta's penalty kill, which ilya kovalchuk has absolutely nothing to do with? let's not even bother.

i find it funny that kovalchuk was a +9 for new jersey and yet everyone's worried about his 'defensive shortcomings'. his defensive shortcomings are magnified when andy sutton and niclas havelid are ice-time leaders on the team. i would have very little concern about kovalchuk's motivation - even though he didn't have a very good playoffs (game 3 was terrible, game 2 was great, the rest were about average for kovalchuk). nor do i think it would be hard to get rid of a kovalchuk contract if that's what it came down to, he is a hall-of-fame player with incredible talent.

If a free agent signing doesn't work, it's not like his market value automatically reverts to whatever it was immediately before the signing. If that was the case, old Dorn woulda been shipped out a long, long time ago.

no, but like i just said, kovalchuk is a hall of famer with a long track record of being awesome. desperate teams will always take a chance on a player like this.

[MantaRay]

First off, stop with the whole apologist "Kovy was a Thrasher only four months ago, so he gets a a bit of a pass on what he did here" angle. Lou made this deal thinking he could help NOW, impact NOW, this was a NOW deal, not a "let him get used to us and then he'll be better next season and the season(s) beyond deal" (I'll always feel that bringing Ilya in was a risk worth taking, regardless of the outcome). Lou knew there was a good chance he wouldn't be coming back here.

In bold: there you go. Blindly looking at stats. Do you really think he was good in the playoffs? Even Triumph admitted in another thread that Kovalchuk didn't have a good playoff. Wow, he scored an ENG goal and a 5-on-3 PPG in five GP. That's awesome stuff. Did he really impact the team that much during the regular season? Because I didn't see that either...not positively, anyway.

I have no idea how good he might be if he stays here (no one here can predict that), but at least my prognosis isn't based almost 100% on sunshiney perfect-case scenarios. I saw enough bad play and shakiness out of Kovalchuk in the time he was here that I'd be very concerned about coughing up big cash and several years to keep him, and are you going to continue to ignore the fact that his motivation has been called into question in Atlanta? I said this a long time ago, but he reminds me of a second-year player who has tremendous upside and is very raw. The problem is he's been in the NHL for several years now.

+1

[DaneykoIsGod]

no, but like i just said, kovalchuk is a hall of famer with a long track record of being awesome. desperate teams will always take a chance on a player like this.

But why would we want to trade him if he continues playing awesome, Hall of Fame-worthy hockey?

IF the Devils sign Kovalchuk, and IF they find themselves shopping him around, wouldn't that mean he's done something to hurt his value? Poor production, injuries, locker room detriment ... whatever. These are the kinds of things that would lead to the Devils wanting to trade him. And these are the kinds of things that would hurt his value.

[Neb00rs]

If a free agent signing doesn't work, it's not like his market value automatically reverts to whatever it was immediately before the signing. If that was the case, old Dorn woulda been shipped out a long, long time ago.

No it doesn't revert back but he will still be tradeable. There will always be teams thaat will take aa guy like Kovy especially if he's under 8.5 a year (which is what the thrashers offered him)

As for the accuasation that I put no blame on Kovy for the Thrashers, well this is true. Without him they don't score and they still get scored on.

[NJDevs26]

i would have very little concern about kovalchuk's motivation - even though he didn't have a very good playoffs (game 3 was terrible, game 2 was great, the rest were about average for kovalchuk). nor do i think it would be hard to get rid of a kovalchuk contract if that's what it came down to, he is a hall-of-fame player with incredible talent.

Well you never know how a guy reacts once he signs a mega-money deal, but in general I agree, it's hard to get on a guy for lacking motivation when he was playing in the Twilight Zone for a decade and had to be the whole team.

He certainly didn't lack motivation here, unlike about 80% of our team this season. Nice that our fans are so willing to show one of the few guys who actually competed the door because of some preconceived notions of him as a person and a player.

[Triumph]

But why would we want to trade him if he continues playing awesome, Hall of Fame-worthy hockey?

IF the Devils sign Kovalchuk, and IF they find themselves shopping him around, wouldn't that mean he's done something to hurt his value? Poor production, injuries, locker room detriment ... whatever. These are the kinds of things that would lead to the Devils wanting to trade him. And these are the kinds of things that would hurt his value.

right, but what i'm saying is that even if kovalchuk somehow turns into a 30-40-70 player over the next two years as a devil and lou's buying stock in welch's with all the jam jars he's breaking, kovalchuk is still close enough to his prime and has a long enough record of awesomeness that he will still be a highly valued commodity around the league.

[Neb00rs]

But why would we want to trade him if he continues playing awesome, Hall of Fame-worthy hockey?

IF the Devils sign Kovalchuk, and IF they find themselves shopping him around, wouldn't that mean he's done something to hurt his value? Poor production, injuries, locker room detriment ... whatever. These are the kinds of things that would lead to the Devils wanting to trade him. And these are the kinds of things that would hurt his value.

No, no matter what production he has he will still be tradeable. Injury is a risk you take when signing even the most assured player to a big deal.

Edited May 5, 2010 by ben00rs

[MantaRay]

Not if you sign him to some 8 year, $80 million contract that only a handful of teams can afford on both their budget and the cap. If you think he's going to sign for peanuts you're mistaken, salary plays into whether he's tradeable or not, as does whether we have to give him a NMC.

[Neb00rs]

First off he's not getting 80 over 8 years anyways. More likely he will get 8 million a year for a long term. And that's a bargain for him. He will be tradeable.

[DaneykoIsGod]

right, but what i'm saying is that even if kovalchuk somehow turns into a 30-40-70 player over the next two years as a devil and lou's buying stock in welch's with all the jam jars he's breaking, kovalchuk is still close enough to his prime and has a long enough record of awesomeness that he will still be a highly valued commodity around the league.

haha Agreed, if Kovalchuk turns into a 30-40-70 player Lou certainly wouldn't have any trouble finding a new home for him. I just don't think he would want to. In each year since the lockout, 70 points would have put Kovalchuk in the Devils top three in scoring. It actually would have been good enough to lead the team in scoring for two of those five years. Not only that, but because of his track record of awesomeness I think Lou would keep him around because he'd believe Kovalchuk could pick those numbers up.

Again, I think that for Lou to sign Kovalchuk and then want to trade him, it would take some kind of downturn drastic enough to hurt his value on the market.

[Neb00rs]

haha Agreed, if Kovalchuk turns into a 30-40-70 player Lou certainly wouldn't have any trouble finding a new home for him. I just don't think he would want to. In each year since the lockout, 70 points would have put Kovalchuk in the Devils top three in scoring. It actually would have been good enough to lead the team in scoring for two of those five years. Not only that, but because of his track record of awesomeness I think Lou would keep him around because he'd believe Kovalchuk could pick those numbers up.

Again, I think that for Lou to sign Kovalchuk and then want to trade him, it would take some kind of downturn drastic enough to hurt his value on the market.

Absolutely DIG. I love how people here are all ready set on the idea that if we sign him we will definitely have to trade him. I think the better chances are on him being successful as a Devil. Imagine having all 2-way players built around the offensive minded Kovy.

Edited May 6, 2010 by ben00rs

[NJDevs26]

First off he's not getting 80 over 8 years anyways. More likely he will get 8 million a year for a long term. And that's a bargain for him. He will be tradeable.

He turned down $100 million plus from the Thrashers and is likely going to get offered even more than that from Russia, I don't think we're getting him at any bargain price.

[Neb00rs]

He turned down $100 million plus from the Thrashers and is likely going to get offered even more than that from Russia, I don't think we're getting him at any bargain price.

He turned down 8.4 a year from the Thrashers. He's not getting more than that anywhere else but Atlanta or Russia. If he signs with the Devils it will be for around 7.5-8. But you are off-topic here, if he wants money he probably won't sign in NJ. The point is that if he signs he'll have a contract that is tradeable.

[NJDevs26]

He's not signing here to win, not after the rest of the team around him quit and we lost for the third straight year in the first round. The only reason he would sign is if we had the best offer in all likelihood, and I doubt Lou would go to that level anyway.

[Neb00rs]

He's not signing here to win, not after the rest of the team around him quit and we lost for the third straight year in the first round. The only reason he would sign is if we had the best offer in all likelihood, and I doubt Lou would go to that level anyway.

If you are saying he is about money, you may be right. But what I think you're saying is that he doesn't want to stay here because he doesn't believe this team can win. I disagree with that, if he is looking to win and not for the biggest possible deal I think he signs here. I get the feeling Kovy likes Lou, likes Patrik, likes Marty, likes ZP9 and likes Zuby and sees them all as winners (at least the first 2). Those guys have been and are going to be our main players in the coming years and so those are the guys Kovy needs to believe in.

Edited May 6, 2010 by ben00rs

[Triumph]

He's not signing here to win, not after the rest of the team around him quit and we lost for the third straight year in the first round. The only reason he would sign is if we had the best offer in all likelihood, and I doubt Lou would go to that level anyway.

oh please. spare me this. like kovalchuk is poring over rosters. he will not go to ANY team that won in the first round this year. and since his two other possible destinations are st. louis and LA, two teams who haven't won a playoff round since before the lockout - the devils still have a leg up in this regard.

[Pepperkorn]

How can you guys read this thread then respond all the multiple times that you have with a straight face?

If you can keep Chuk at a reasonable price you do it -- if you can't you don't... there's nothing more to be said.

anyone who says break the bank for him is thick and anyone who says get rid of him at all costs is equally as obtuse. So two stupid sides of a stupid argument are sucking in a few moderate folks to go over to one side or another. It's the illogical fruitless stupid kind of thread that drives me nuts.

So what is all your excuses for being such dumbasses? now THAT'S the REAL point of this thread and why I keep reading

I'm also waiting for someone to just fess up and say he has an irrational hatred and just wants him off the team due to NOTHING but a gut feeling and gut feeling only.

Tri - you're really stuck in a fruitless endeavor here there's only emotion involved and just half&half facts being bandied about as if they provide real solid justification to not even negotiate. It's -- just a phenomenal waste of your time.

You all are trying to hone your skills of manipulation, not actually put forth any reasonable argument. Because there is no reasonable argument to take a strong stance one way or the other. It's the clearest decision Lou's got -- come up with the budget figure, put it out there and get a yes or no then: end of story. What could be easier?

Tri -- you're trying to figure out how to force people into admitting they're unreasonable... if you succeed I have this great position called Ambassador to Iran you might be interested in.

[DaneykoIsGod]

If you can keep Chuk at a reasonable price you do it -- if you can't you don't... there's nothing more to be said.

That actually pretty much sums up how I feel on the matter. I'll be happy if Lou finds a way to keep him, but it wouldn't be the end of the world if he can't. True, a talent like Kovalchuk doesn't come around very often and it's even less often that the Devils actually flirt with signing such a talent. But keeping him at a cost of financially crippling the team just isn't worth it.

In Lou We Trust.

[Neb00rs]

How can you guys read this thread then respond all the multiple times that you have with a straight face?

If you can keep Chuk at a reasonable price you do it -- if you can't you don't... there's nothing more to be said.

anyone who says break the bank for him is thick and anyone who says get rid of him at all costs is equally as obtuse. So two stupid sides of a stupid argument are sucking in a few moderate folks to go over to one side or another. It's the illogical fruitless stupid kind of thread that drives me nuts.

Who's saying break the bank for him? The argument in this thread is about A. Whether he's worth it at his price B. Whether he can end up being a good player for us. That's all perfectly legitimate discussion.

[Jerzey]

Well Jagr decided to stay in Russia for one more year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=5165917

The HF Boards have rumor of Jokinen going to Russia next year.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=772510

Maybe Kovi will end up in Russia.

Edited May 6, 2010 by Jerzey Devil