Jump to content

Photo

We now have the 30th pick


  • Please log in to reply
171 replies to this topic

#121 SMantzas

SMantzas

    Head Coach

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,311 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:01 PM

And meanwhile, this list is barely correlated with actual success, as both NJ and Detroit are near the bottom, yet are by far the two most consistently good franchises in the league since 1996. A few Dolphins fans tried to make a similar argument that the Dolphins have been better at drafting than New England and Green Bay based on the number of roster players they actually drafted. It's true only so far as it goes.


To play devil's advocate NJ had some impressive undrafted UFA like Madden, Rafalski, Greene and Clarkson
  • 0

#122 David Puddy

David Puddy

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,330 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:10 PM

To be fair, a drafted player is never a guarantee. NHL players to play 400+ games drafted since 1996: (tampa... yikes)

 

 

Buffalo: 19

San Jose: 18

Ottawa: 17

Pittsburgh: 15 *

Los Angeles: 14 *

New York I: 14

Anaheim: 13 *

Boston: 13 *

Edmonton: 13

Montreal: 13

Calgary: 12

Chicago: 12 **

Colorado: 12 **

Toronto: 12

Washington: 11

Atlanta/Winnipeg: 10

Nashville: 10 (since 1998)

Vancouver: 10

New Jersey: 9 **

Carolina/Hartford: 9 *

New York R: 9

Dallas: 9 *

Florida: 9

Philadelphia: 9

Phoenix: 9

Detroit: 8 ****

St Louis: 8

Columbus: 7 (only since 2000)

Minnesota: 7 (since 2000)

Tampa Bay: 4 *

 

There doesn't seem to be much correlation between draft success and winning the cup at a quick glance, but 6 of the last 7 cups were won by teams in the top half of the list. It's a lot easier to build a team when you don't have to give up assets to fill your NHL roster.


  • 0
Posted Image

#123 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,603 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:15 PM

There doesn't seem to be much correlation between draft success and winning the cup at a quick glance, but 6 of the last 7 cups were won by teams in the top half of the list. It's a lot easier to build a team when you don't have to give up assets to fill your NHL roster.


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.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#124 lazer

lazer

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,900 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:15 PM

I'm really starting to believe that before game 6 of the 1994 ECF, Bettman went to Lou, told him the team should take a dive, and that it would be made up to him as long as he remained the GM. 

were always discussing how Kovy leaving was some type of set up; wish there were some information on it other than pure speculation.

 

unless this post was a joke, either way this is some good hockey god karma


Edited by lazer, 06 March 2014 - 06:46 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#125 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,603 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:21 PM

were always discussing how Kovy leaving was some type of set up; wish there were some information on it other than pure speculation.

unless this post was a joke, either way this is some hockey god karma


Yes I was being facetious


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#126 SterioDesign

SterioDesign

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,186 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:34 PM

So we should try to win the cup, then it's like nothing ever happened  :wink2:  :wink2:


  • 0

www.SterioDesign.com

 


#127 BlueSkirt

BlueSkirt

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,901 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 05:52 PM

 

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 !


  • 0

#128 BlueSkirt

BlueSkirt

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,901 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 06:02 PM

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   !


  • 0

#129 Devils Pride 26

Devils Pride 26

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,274 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 06:19 PM

You're welcome, guys. It's my birthday - I asked for the pick back.


  • 1

#130 cgb6397

cgb6397

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 06:25 PM

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.


  • 0
6qf7l3.jpg
"You know my boss, (Lou Lamoriello), we don't throw parades for second place"
-Pete Deboer on the Devils 5th Stanley Cup Final appearence

#131 CarpathianForest

CarpathianForest

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,763 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 07:25 PM

So that means the SCF winner picks 29th?


  • 0

#132 Mike Brown

Mike Brown

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,308 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 07:37 PM

If you disregard the poll results, and just read the replies, a lot of people are siding with the Devils.

 

http://hfboards.hock...d.php?t=1619049


  • 0

NEW JERSEY DEVILS: 3 TIME STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!

NEW YORK YANKEES: 27 TIME WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!

SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS: 5 TIME SUPER BOWL CHAMPIONS!


#133 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,603 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 07:39 PM

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
  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#134 smelly

smelly

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,109 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 07:41 PM

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.

 


  • 0

#135 CarpathianForest

CarpathianForest

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,763 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 07:43 PM

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.


  • 0

#136 lazer

lazer

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,900 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 07:59 PM

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 by lazer, 06 March 2014 - 08:28 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#137 MadDog2020

MadDog2020

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,981 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 08:11 PM

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.


  • 0
iq0p.pngUploaded with ImageShack.com

#138 LucifersDog

LucifersDog

    Broken Record

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,786 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 08:20 PM

http://blogs.northje...m/blogs/fireice

 

 

Owners made the appeal.


  • 0

#139 devilsfan26

devilsfan26

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,823 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 08:25 PM

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.


  • 0
"Swim against the tide, don't follow the group, stay away from the majority, seek out the fresh and new, stay away from the poseurs, and don't be a barnacle. Be original, be different, be passionate, be selfless and be free. Be a hockey fan."
--John Buccigross

#140 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,603 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 08:44 PM

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 by Daniel, 06 March 2014 - 09:09 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users