redruM Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 As much as I hated it at the time, Arnott and McKay and a 1st for Langenbrunner and Nieuwendyk. Also, Sykora for Tverdovsky and Friesen ended up being huge. Hated & still hate the Sykora trade... friesen was awful... Kurvers had to be the #1 trade Almo made Gomez great, no doubt that was a great trade... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Hated & still hate the Sykora trade... friesen was awful... Kurvers had to be the #1 trade Almo made Gomez great, no doubt that was a great trade... Friesen scored some huge goals (most notably Game 7 against Ottawa and 2 in Game 7 against Anaheim), though. Sykora's time was pretty much done in Jersey, especially if the rumors that Stevens had questioned his heart were true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 This was the icing on the cake for the 2nd Cup. i wanted to look it up to make sure, but mogilny was pretty much a passenger for that playoff run. had some important goals but that run was about marty, stevens, lemieux and the A-line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Although not the best Cam Janssen for Bryce Salvador worked out nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Friesen scored some huge goals (most notably Game 7 against Ottawa and 2 in Game 7 against Anaheim), though. Sykora's time was pretty much done in Jersey, especially if the rumors that Stevens had questioned his heart were true.. He knows, red just hates Friesen. Its kind of like the sky being blue and water being wet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 i wanted to look it up to make sure, but mogilny was pretty much a passenger for that playoff run. had some important goals but that run was about marty, stevens, lemieux and the A-line In the playoffs it's all about depth, having a big time scorer on your second line was a huge factor. The speed of Mogilny made matching against the Devils an defensive nightmare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshall Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 or the Kovalchuk Trade: To ATL: Johnny Oduya, Nicklas Bergfors, Patrice Cormier, NJ 1st, NJ 2nd To NJ: Ilya Kovalchuk, Anssi Salmela, ATL 2nd (Jon Merrill) Considering how none of what we traded has panned out for ATL/WPG, and we got both a franchise forward and a high-end defense prospect, I think you could make a real strong case that the Kovy deal is the best in Devils history. In 4-5 years it could end up as theft, 3 million bucks and forfeited draft pick included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Either the Kurvers Trade: To TOR: Tom Kurvers To NJ: 3rd Overall (Scott Niedermayer) Toronto was actually last overall that season for a while...they traded some youth for veterans just to avoid watching another team draft Lindros. Kurvers was actually pretty good for them his first year there...but he was always a problem in his own end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 In 4-5 years it could end up as theft, 3 million bucks and forfeited draft pick included. Unless you also want to make the argument that signing Kovalchuk resulted in not re-signing Parise. That's been what TG has argued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck the Duck Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Unless you also want to make the argument that signing Kovalchuk resulted in not re-signing Parise. That's been what TG has argued. Does TG still believe that now? I know he was speculating before this past FA period began, and Parise signed in Minny, but I thought it was pretty clear following everything that transpired this summer that the Kovy deal had nothing to do with Parise's decision to leave NJ (other than maybe drive up the market value of top end FA's like Parise and Suter). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshall Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Unless you also want to make the argument that signing Kovalchuk resulted in not re-signing Parise. That's been what TG has argued. Yes, but I don't want to make that argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaira_Devil_#9 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Hated & still hate the Sykora trade... friesen was awful... Kurvers had to be the #1 trade Almo made Gomez great, no doubt that was a great trade... Havent seen that in a while on here, it made me smile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Does TG still believe that now? I know he was speculating before this past FA period began, and Parise signed in Minny, but I thought it was pretty clear following everything that transpired this summer that the Kovy deal had nothing to do with Parise's decision to leave NJ (other than maybe drive up the market value of top end FA's like Parise and Suter). From TG's standpoint, if the Devils hadn't spent so much money and effort signing Kovy when they did, they could have worked out an extension with Parise before the start of last season. There is some validity to that. From what I've heard, the offer on the table at that time was 7/50. If Kovy weren't owed so much money, that offer could have been 8/64 or something like it, which might have been enough for Parise to forego UFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshall Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 IIRC I read that Parise was ready to sign 7/50 but agent said he could hold out for more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
95Crash Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 In the playoffs it's all about depth, having a big time scorer on your second line was a huge factor. The speed of Mogilny made matching against the Devils an defensive nightmare. He certainly helped the Devs knock off the Flyers in the 2000 ECF, scoring the game-winner in Game 6 and I believe getting an assist on Elias' game-winner in Game 7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 IIRC I read that Parise was ready to sign 7/50 but agent said he could hold out for more? Supposedly, there was an offer like that around February, and Zach's agents advised him to wait for free agency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I'd take Zach at 5/45 but not 7/50. What's interesting about these long contracts is going back into the recent past and looking at scoring leaders from 2000, say. What if half of them were signed to lifetime deals - some of them would look real good and others really bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Havent seen that in a while on here, it made me smile. Not sure what all the Friesen hate is about...10 playoff goals in the '03 playoffs. He did suck after that, but he was solid in '02-'03 and he stepped up come playoff time that year. He was always a headcase and seemed to lose it awfully quick after '03 (in 204 GP with 4 different teams from '03-'04 on, he scored just 27 goals and added just 33 assists), and he was awful in '03-'04, but he was the right guy at the right time in '03...Devils probably don't win that Cup without him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Supposedly, there was an offer like that around February, and Zach's agents advised him to wait for free agency. Yeah, but without the money and cap hit for Kovalchuk, the offer likely would have been higher, and made before the start of last season with Zach coming off a season where he hadn't played. And I absolutely would have taken Zach at 7/50 no questions asked. For all intents and purposes it's the same deal as Elias got, which turned out very well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Yeah, but without the money and cap hit for Kovalchuk, the offer likely would have been higher, and made before the start of last season with Zach coming off a season where he hadn't played. And I absolutely would have taken Zach at 7/50 no questions asked. For all intents and purposes it's the same deal as Elias got, which turned out very well. I'd say the returns on Elias' deal were mixed, especially the first couple of years. Overall the Devils got about a B to B- on that investment, which when you consider how these deals sometimes go, is pretty good...some of these deals are flat-out disasters from Day 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 IIRC I read that Parise was ready to sign 7/50 but agent said he could hold out for more? Supposedly, there was an offer like that around February, and Zach's agents advised him to wait for free agency. this is what i got from pretty solid sources. minny's involvement did show up only this season so it is true that parise might have been ready to sign a long term deal for less during the summer of kovalchuk but that ship has sailed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Yeah, but without the money and cap hit for Kovalchuk, the offer likely would have been higher, and made before the start of last season with Zach coming off a season where he hadn't played. And I absolutely would have taken Zach at 7/50 no questions asked. For all intents and purposes it's the same deal as Elias got, which turned out very well. That's definitely very possible. Zach was looking for big money, and if there was more to give, he may have stayed. I still think he was going to free agency no matter what. I also think if you get a chance to land a player like Kovalchuk, you have to take it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 And I absolutely would have taken Zach at 7/50 no questions asked. For all intents and purposes it's the same deal as Elias got, which turned out very well. Sure didn't look that way after the first two years, did it? It turned out well because the cap exploded and Elias maintained his level of play - somehow. Elias's shot rate has plummeted but he is still an outstanding defensive player. He's one of the smartest players in the NHL. It wouldn't surprise me if he is +1000 shot attempts in the Corsi era. The Devils' situation has changed also - if they were going to be a cap team, 7/50 is fine, but if they are not, it sucks. 7 years is a goddamn long time and if that contract went bad it would seriously impact the Devils' ability to get a decent replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I'd say the returns on Elias' deal were mixed, especially the first couple of years. Overall the Devils got about a B to B- on that investment, which when you consider how these deals sometimes go, is pretty good...some of these deals are flat-out disasters from Day 1. I'd say at least a B+. His production declined, that was to be expected. The money he got is the cost of doing business. The Devils are a significantly worse team without him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I'd say the returns on Elias' deal were mixed, especially the first couple of years. Overall the Devils got about a B to B- on that investment, which when you consider how these deals sometimes go, is pretty good...some of these deals are flat-out disasters from Day 1. For a 7 year deal on a 30 year old player that looks like it's going to stay good up until the end, I'd say they got a B+ at least. Some of these big deals are going to go awful bad soon. Vincent Lecavalier already looks bad, for instance, and it's got 7 years left. 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.