TSN Interview with Lou

[devils102]

It's 28 minutes... which is a surprise to begin with... hard to imagine Lou sitting down for that long for a media interview.

 

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/video/lamoriello-passionate-about-maple-leafs-project~709631

 

He talks about the last five years with the Devils starting at 3:50. He attributes missing the playoffs four of the last five years to losing "certain types of people because of the status of the franchise". I'm assuming that's Zach and because we were poor? I've heard people speculate about that but that's the first I've heard Lou say it himself (kind of).

 

On team rules:

 

-9:20 "I've never had a written rule in 28 years." Doesn't say which of his rules will come along to Toronto. Says everyone will agree on the rules. If someone wants to grow a beard this year can they? "You'll just have to wait and see."

 

-Team flights will no longer allow team broadcasters on the flights in Toronto.

 

-11:35 - He's asked if he once didn't allow Nets minority owners on a flight with the team. "I don't recall that situation happening."

 

-20:15 If the Leafs are fighting for a playoff spot at the deadline... are you buying or selling?: "You really expect me to answer that question?"

 

"I really don't have an answer for that." - most other questions 

 

Focuses mostly on the Leafs... I've mentioned about all of the Devils stuff.

Edited September 22, 2015 by devils102

[Devilsfan118]

No sense getting upset about it, but I yeah that's the first time I've seen Lou more or less confirm the JVB situation caused us to lose Zach.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Chuck the Duck]

I think he's alluded to it before in interviews.  From what came out afterwards, apparently the Devils made a significant offer but couldn't give him the up front $$ that he got in Minny. 

[BostonNala370]

No sense getting upset about it, but I yeah that's the first time I've seen Lou more or less confirm the JVB situation caused us to lose Zach.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

Happen in 2012, this is 2015.

[roomtemp]

I think he's alluded to it before in interviews.  From what came out afterwards, apparently the Devils made a significant offer but couldn't give him the up front $$ that he got in Minny. 

Which he only wanted due to the lockout coming about.

[DevsMan84]

Was it ever confirmed what the "significant offer" Lou made was?  A lot of people assuming it was the same as the Wild but without the bonuses but I see nothing beyond speculation of that.

[Pepperkorn]

I think a lot of his innuendos regarding events on the Devils are pretty much crap.  End of the day it's on Lou.  So a lot is just damage control and softening of his past mistakes to make the Leafs a more attractive destination IF any of his policies drove players away.

 

There is no doubt in my mind Zach Parise's leaving had very little to do with money - and I dont see Lou allowing himself to be hi-jacked to THAT degree - Suter or some other buddy would have to have been in the deal too I'm sure just to soften the Langenbrunner fiasco as distant as that may seem to everyone now. Fact is - over-paying for "character" players hamstrung the team a lot IMO.

 

I think the chatter about the Devils encouraging players to play hurt is upsetting to Lou.  I might be misinterpreting a little but still.   As if he couldn't pay a better medical staff?  As if he couldn't make that a priority for some reason?  Like ownership was saying "Hell no - put that injured guy out there - his absence will hinder the bottom line!"  I think it just never really occurred to him how to fix the problem.

 

I wish that the Devils had been able to mediate a wedding of old knowledge with new.  I get that it's not worth the effort with so much to do.  I just think it could have been handled with a lot more integrity and confidence. I have to say - I am impressed with Shannahan's confidence.  Although we all know what they say about confidence.  It's that feel you get before you fully understand the situation.

[BostonNala370]

Lou is using JVB as an excuse.

 

His failed attempt to renegotiate  during the season, a Lou policy, cost the Devils/ It's all on Lou, no matter who he blames after the fact.

[themightyall]

My favorite part was McKenzie reacting to beards at 10:25.  It reminded me of this:

 

[Chuck the Duck]

Was it ever confirmed what the "significant offer" Lou made was? A lot of people assuming it was the same as the Wild but without the bonuses but I see nothing beyond speculation of that.

I never heard that the offer was for the same money as what the wild ended up paying. Zach and Lou both mentioned that Devils made a substantial offer that was close, then it later came out that the Devils couldn't structure their deal like the wild did. Unless both Zach and Lou are lying about the Devils offer, which is always a possibility.

[roomtemp]

I never heard that the offer was for the same money as what the wild ended up paying. Zach and Lou both mentioned that Devils made a substantial offer that was close, then it later came out that the Devils couldn't structure their deal like the wild did. Unless both Zach and Lou are lying about the Devils offer, which is always a possibility.

IT was the signing bonus. Parise and Suter wanted signing bonuses to guarantee a large portion of their salaries in case there was a lockout.  Vanderbeek couldn't get a 10 million dollar lump sum at that point and the Wild could do double that. He was probably going to go play with Suter in any case with the Wild but maybe Suter wasn't 100% sold on going to Minnesota at the time so he was talking with the Devils in case that happened (or maybe the Wild would have gone elsewhere for forward earlier that offseason if it wasn't a package deal). I don't know but its all pointless speculation at this point

Edited September 23, 2015 by roomtemp

[SterioDesign]

the short fact is, Lou didn't lose Zach because of the money situation. He lost him because he CHOOSE to gamble Zach. That's it. He wasn't blindsided or anything he knew all along. He had complete control over Zach's situation for quite awhile but he decided to gamble the situation and let it drag past where Zach had 100% control. That's 100% on him. That's of course simplified but saying Lou had NO control at all is simply finding excuses for him. GMs who CANNOT keep a player knows it and trade him at the right time. Of course it sucks but thats part of the business. Sure, he gambled cause we were in the playoffs and everything but exactly, he gambled. That's it.

 

Other teams went through "similar" scenarios where they couldn't afford a player or wanted to make sure they'd retain them and keep control over their future. Well in all cases they dealt with the situation while they had control. Lou backed himself in a corner (and please don't say Lou couldnt do this and that because of the owners... he dealt with 99% of his players that exact same way and went out of his ways like... 5 times... 3 of them being AFTER zach left)

Edited September 23, 2015 by SterioDesign

[MadDog2020]

the short fact is, Lou didn't lose Zach because of the money situation. He lost him because he CHOOSE to gamble Zach. That's it. He wasn't blindsided or anything he knew all along. He had complete control over Zach's situation for quite awhile but he decided to gamble the situation and let it drag past where Zach had 100% control. That's 100% on him. That's of course simplified but saying Lou had NO control at all is simply finding excuses for him. GMs who CANNOT keep a player knows it and trade him at the right time. Of course it sucks but thats part of the business. Sure, he gambled cause we were in the playoffs and everything but exactly, he gambled. That's it.

Other teams went through "similar" scenarios where they couldn't afford a player or wanted to make sure they'd retain them and keep control over their future. Well in all cases they dealt with the situation while they had control. Lou backed himself in a corner (and please don't say Lou couldnt do this and that because of the owners... he dealt with 99% of his players that exact same way and went out of his ways like... 5 times... 3 of them being AFTER zach left)

You've given your opinion on this subject about 95577 times in about 1068467 different ways. We got it.

[SterioDesign]

You've given your opinion on this subject about 95577 times in about 1068467 different ways. We got it.

 

it's a message board. It was 110% on topic and If i feel like posting my opinion for the 95577th time or post a picture of my dog eating a banana. I'll do it. 

Edited September 24, 2015 by SterioDesign

[Lateralous]

I was not a fan of Lou's work over the last decade and wanted him pushed aside but I do believe that Zach not resigning was a JVB thing.   You guys are talking about the offseason where Zach was a UFA but I think money issues were absolutely the reason they couldn't do a more significant deal with him the previous offseason.  Telling ZP he had to wait a year to get his, one summer after the Kovy contract kind of set the table for his leaving IMO.  It still doesn't change the fact that there was a lot of mismanagement in Lou's later years and the offense is still way more than one ZP away from being a serious contender.       

[Devil Dan 56]

the short fact is, Lou didn't lose Zach because of the money situation. He lost him because he CHOOSE to gamble Zach. That's it. He wasn't blindsided or anything he knew all along. He had complete control over Zach's situation for quite awhile but he decided to gamble the situation and let it drag past where Zach had 100% control. That's 100% on him. That's of course simplified but saying Lou had NO control at all is simply finding excuses for him. GMs who CANNOT keep a player knows it and trade him at the right time. Of course it sucks but thats part of the business. Sure, he gambled cause we were in the playoffs and everything but exactly, he gambled. That's it.

Other teams went through "similar" scenarios where they couldn't afford a player or wanted to make sure they'd retain them and keep control over their future. Well in all cases they dealt with the situation while they had control. Lou backed himself in a corner (and please don't say Lou couldnt do this and that because of the owners... he dealt with 99% of his players that exact same way and went out of his ways like... 5 times... 3 of them being AFTER zach left)

Let it gooooo let it goooooooooo.

You got Shero. Just move on with your life. To use one of your relationship analogies, you're like a guy who gets a new girlfriend but can't stop complaining about and Facebook stalking his ex.

[adavid]

All I know is that I have center ice tickets for the Devs/Canes on Dec 3rd.

[MadDog2020]

it's a message board. It was 110% on topic and If i feel like posting my opinion for the 95577th time or post a picture of my dog eating a banana. I'll do it.

Ooooooo you told me I guess. Maybe you'd like to regurgitate your opinion on the matter again, I don't think we got it the first 700 times. [emoji106]

[NLinfante]

This is obviously an old debate, but you cannot argue with the fact that ZP only played 13 games his second to last year with the club. If you want to argue that Lou should have given him a massive extension before the season, then that's your opinion, but you're Monday morning QB'ing at least a little. If Lou signs him for 7 years before 2010/2011, and ZP has a catastrophic knee injury and is never the same player, how would you feel about the extension then? Or what if the team signed him to that extension and then legitimately couldn't afford to pay it?

 

Was it great for the franchise? No. But that's the way things happen sometimes. If everyone had the perfect foresight, ZP would have been a Ranger (or something else) and not a Devil to begin with.

[dmon2010]

it's a message board. It was 110% on topic and If i feel like posting my opinion for the 95577th time or post a picture of my dog eating a banana. I'll do it. 

Does your dog really eat bananas?  Because that would be awesome... and you should definitely post a pic of that.

[Lateralous]

This is obviously an old debate, but you cannot argue with the fact that ZP only played 13 games his second to last year with the club. If you want to argue that Lou should have given him a massive extension before the season, then that's your opinion, but you're Monday morning QB'ing at least a little. If Lou signs him for 7 years before 2010/2011, and ZP has a catastrophic knee injury and is never the same player, how would you feel about the extension then? Or what if the team signed him to that extension and then legitimately couldn't afford to pay it?

 

Was it great for the franchise? No. But that's the way things happen sometimes. If everyone had the perfect foresight, ZP would have been a Ranger (or something else) and not a Devil to begin with.

 

Not sure if this was directed at me but my point was that I think Lou did want to sign Parise long-term when he was an RFA, regardless of the knee injury, but was handicapped by JVB's finances. That's not Monday morning QBing, simply stating that Lou was handicapped by Ownership.  

 

Besides, Zach had a knee injury.  Athletes blow out knees all the time and come back fine.  Given that Lou later signed Clowe to a 5 year deal coming off several concussions and Zajac to an 8 year deal despite not playing anywhere near as well as he did pre achillies injury, I seriously doubt he was taking a prove your health stance with Parise's knee.  

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

I'll go ahead and assume that SD won't be delivering the eulogy at Lou's funeral.

 

Anyway, re: Clowe, I don't think we'll ever understand that one, because I don't Lou himself really had a plan anymore by that point...I think the guy who signed Clowe was a different man that the guy who might've been concerned with Parise's knee (and just spec on my part, I have no idea if Parise's health played into Lou's thinking at all).  I've said it before, but I think the last batch of years left Lou a little shaken (even with the Cup run), and even though he still did some good things (like trading for Schneider), I think he was so far removed from his preferred way of doing things that he wasn't really sure what to do, and that showed in some of his moves.  I know the eras were very different, but I think the mid-90s Lou would've asked the 2010s Lou "Clowe?!  C'mon man, what the hell are you doing?!" 

[SterioDesign]

I'll go ahead and assume that SD won't be delivering the eulogy at Lou's funeral.

 

Anyway, re: Clowe, I don't think we'll ever understand that one, because I don't Lou himself really had a plan anymore by that point...I think the guy who signed Clowe was a different man that the guy who might've been concerned with Parise's knee (and just spec on my part, I have no idea if Parise's health played into Lou's thinking at all).  I've said it before, but I think the last batch of years left Lou a little shaken (even with the Cup run), and even though he still did some good things (like trading for Schneider), I think he was so far removed from his preferred way of doing things that he wasn't really sure what to do, and that showed in some of his moves.  I know the eras were very different, but I think the mid-90s Lou would've asked the 2010s Lou "Clowe?!  C'mon man, what the hell are you doing?!" 

 

lol well like i told you before, i don't hate the guy. Just really hated his methods.

 

But anyway you honestly don't understand why he gave Clowe that contract? It seems pretty damn clear to me

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

lol well like i told you before, i don't hate the guy. Just really hated his methods.

 

But anyway you honestly don't understand why he gave Clowe that contract? It seems pretty damn clear to me

 

I know, was just making a joke.

 

With Clowe's concussion history, yeah, don't understand the thinking, even if a healthy Clowe would've filled a need.  Was just way too risky.  I'll admit that I don't know if there were other bidders lining up to make the same mistake though.  At that kind of money I'd like to think Lou wasn't just bidding against himself.

[SterioDesign]

I know, was just making a joke.

 

With Clowe's concussion history, yeah, don't understand the thinking, even if a healthy Clowe would've filled a need.  Was just way too risky.  I'll admit that I don't know if there were other bidders lining up to make the same mistake though.  At that kind of money I'd like to think Lou wasn't just bidding against himself.

 

i remember Clowe saying there was a few teams but that Lou was particularly aggressive.

 

Anyway to me it's pretty clear it was a panic move after losing a few guys for nothing. As soon Lou heard what Clarkson was looking for he gave up on him and went after Clowe.