RAY SHERO = NEW GM. Coach decision is Shero's.

[Devil Dan 56]

“They wanted a view outside the organization,” said Lamoriello. “They wanted a fresh view.”

fvck these owners, they are scum. Total classless move that they have not issued a statement on Lou's new position, and thanked him for his years of service for the team.

Scum? That's a little much. I like Lou too but it's time to move on. It's not like they fired him or anything.

[Devil Dan 56]

http://m.torontosun.com/2015/05/06/lou-lamoriello-had-a-devil-of-a-time-in-new-jersey

Good read. Lou opens up a bit.

 

Classic... one of the biggest trades in team history made from a phone booth... 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe the best trade Lamoriello ever made was managed from a telephone booth in Hartford. He was on the line with a rather desperate Floyd Smith, then general manager of the Maple Leafs, who needed help on his blue line.

Lamoriello offered up Tom Kurvers in October 1989, “who was a pretty good NHL defenceman at the time.”

He got back the Leafs first pick in the 1991 draft.

“We thought we were taking a shot at getting Eric Lindros,” said Lamoriello. “That was the intention of the deal. And lo and behold, it didn’t work out that way.”

He did better. They got Scott Niedermayer, the most decorated winner in modern hockey history. “He was a terrific player for us.”

[JohnnyP.]

Interesting read.  I've said it before, and I know it likely won't happen, but I really wish Lou would write a book about his tenure in hockey once he retires.

 2nd that

[themightyall]

I've never once heard about a budgetary meeting for the Devils.  While that may just be a new thing that may not mean much, with a team in this position, it sounds like they are expecting the world or else they are bare minimum expenses.  These owners sound more and more like penny pinchers looking for short sighted gains or continued cheapness.  I still haven't seen anything otherwise.

 

"...We're going to want and ask for a ROI (return on investment) in terms of winning on our investment. So, if we are asked to make significant investments, we're going to make them when and if they make sense, but we're going to hold people accountable for those decisions.”

 

They sound callous and impatient to the process.  How can a GM really turn around anything in a short amount of time without buying into the process?

 

http://fireandice.northjersey.com/fire-ice-1.174987/devils-budget-meeting-today-as-coaching-search-continues-1.1342385

[Devilsfan118]

They're smart businessmen, they're not penny pinchers.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with what they said - it's pretty much what many of us have been saying for a while now.  They're willing to invest in the team if it's a smart decision that will allow the team to be successful..they're not just going to allow Lou / Shero to spend money carelessly.  

 

Throwing money at a couple middle-of-the-pack veterans isn't a smart investment, and won't solve any problems for the team going forward.

[DevsMan84]

I've never once heard about a budgetary meeting for the Devils.  While that may just be a new thing that may not mean much, with a team in this position, it sounds like they are expecting the world or else they are bare minimum expenses.  These owners sound more and more like penny pinchers looking for short sighted gains or continued cheapness.  I still haven't seen anything otherwise.

 

"...We're going to want and ask for a ROI (return on investment) in terms of winning on our investment. So, if we are asked to make significant investments, we're going to make them when and if they make sense, but we're going to hold people accountable for those decisions.”

 

They sound callous and impatient to the process.  How can a GM really turn around anything in a short amount of time without buying into the process?

 

http://fireandice.northjersey.com/fire-ice-1.174987/devils-budget-meeting-today-as-coaching-search-continues-1.1342385

 

How in the world did you come to that conclusion?  The article seems quite the opposite.  The first sentence you posted "We're going to want and ask for a ROI (return on investment) in terms of winning on our investment" means that they want to see a return of WINNING on their investment.  They are not talking about a financial return (though winning usually = $).

 

I really don't have an issue with them holding people accountable for their actions.  Isn't that what a good owner does?  They gave Lou 2 years and carte blanche to spend and the return was 2 straight years of missed playoffs.  Looks like from the article that they have no problems spending as much as they need to win, but they will spend wisely and not just foolishly throwing money around a la 98-2004 Rangers.

[sundstrom]

I've never once heard about a budgetary meeting for the Devils.  While that may just be a new thing that may not mean much, with a team in this position, it sounds like they are expecting the world or else they are bare minimum expenses.  These owners sound more and more like penny pinchers looking for short sighted gains or continued cheapness.  I still haven't seen anything otherwise.

 

"...We're going to want and ask for a ROI (return on investment) in terms of winning on our investment. So, if we are asked to make significant investments, we're going to make them when and if they make sense, but we're going to hold people accountable for those decisions.”

 

They sound callous and impatient to the process.  How can a GM really turn around anything in a short amount of time without buying into the process?

 

http://fireandice.northjersey.com/fire-ice-1.174987/devils-budget-meeting-today-as-coaching-search-continues-1.1342385

 

are you kidding? you never may have heard about a "meeting" but Lou would always say, "ownership has given me the ability to do whatever we need" which in truth was bullsh!t anyway. you're looking for issues with these owners when, to this point, there are NONE. well, unless you blame them for getting rid of RR part 2 so you can't chant YOU SUCK.

 

these guys are the opposite of impatient. if they were impatient, you'd get pegula like moves signing antoine vermette to a 5 year $25MM deal. they've already said that their willing to invest time into building a long term winning team (see Chicago as an example).

 

everything you read basically says "rebuild" without using the word.

[themightyall]

I didn't say about financial return.  I'm talking about slow progressive change.  I heard "Unless we have x wins more, you can't pay more than y dollars."

 

Where has Lou gotten carte blache the past two years?  I agree he probably got it two years ago and that's why he traded for Ruutu but last year, did you get the sense he was a spend thrift?  Havlat was bargain bin.  Gomez, Bernier, Tootoo, you can go on and on.  Bargain bin.  A couple weeks ago they talked about winning as most important, but now they are talking about ROI for winning which sounds so much more short sighted.  "Yeah, you could get that guy, but does that really mean anything?"  It's words they used before.  Everyone trusts these owners but I'm not seeing it.

 

 

are you kidding? you never may have heard about a "meeting" but Lou would always say, "ownership has given me the ability to do whatever we need" which in truth was bullsh!t anyway. you're looking for issues with these owners when, to this point, there are NONE. well, unless you blame them for getting rid of RR part 2 so you can't chant YOU SUCK.

 

these guys are the opposite of impatient. if they were impatient, you'd get pegula like moves signing antoine vermette to a 5 year $25MM deal. they've already said that their willing to invest time into building a long term winning team (see Chicago as an example).

 

everything you read basically says "rebuild" without using the word.

 

There are different views of impatience.  I don't trust these owners to try for constant winning.  I think they are going to look at money and winning:  "We didn't win the Cup, so losing any amount of money isn't tolerable" is short sighted.  It's amazing how you guys have just bought into these owners so quickly.

Edited May 26, 2015 by themightyall

[RunninWithTheDevil]

I've never once heard about a budgetary meeting for the Devils.  While that may just be a new thing that may not mean much, with a team in this position, it sounds like they are expecting the world or else they are bare minimum expenses.  These owners sound more and more like penny pinchers looking for short sighted gains or continued cheapness.  I still haven't seen anything otherwise.

 

"...We're going to want and ask for a ROI (return on investment) in terms of winning on our investment. So, if we are asked to make significant investments, we're going to make them when and if they make sense, but we're going to hold people accountable for those decisions.”

 

They sound callous and impatient to the process.  How can a GM really turn around anything in a short amount of time without buying into the process?

 

http://fireandice.northjersey.com/fire-ice-1.174987/devils-budget-meeting-today-as-coaching-search-continues-1.1342385

 

Really? Because to me that sounds like the smartest thing I've heard about this team in terms of business since they got to Newark.

[Jerzey]

What I got from this, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that Lou and Shero will not be able to make any big moves without passing it by ownership first. In other words, if Lou and Shero try to trade for Kessel or something they have to check with the owners first.

[themightyall]

Really? Because to me that sounds like the smartest thing I've heard about this team in terms of business since they got to Newark.

 

I'd rather them say, "I want to do everything we can to win as soon as possible."  Doesn't that sound better?  I don't care that VBK was bankrupt; do you know why?  WE GOT TO THE CUP!  These owners need to not ask for justification for spending because they do not understand the reasoning for it.  If they were funding a grant for an astrophysics experiment, would you expect to have these kinds of benchmarks?  And don't go to the article and say that they are asking for timeframes, they gave Lou 2 years when he has had the best track record as any.  I see it as 2 years for any coach/GM when it takes longer to build an organization.

 

What I got from this, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that Lou and Shero will not be able to make any big moves without passing it by ownership first. In other words, if Lou and Shero try to trade for Kessel or something they have to check with the owners first.

 

Exactly.  Do you really want a check with me system with a bunch of financiers when it comes to hockey?

Edited May 26, 2015 by themightyall

[DevsMan84]

I'd rather them say, "I want to do everything we can to win as soon as possible."  Doesn't that sound better?  I don't care that VBK was bankrupt; do you know why?  WE GOT TO THE CUP!  These owners need to not ask for justification for spending because they do not understand the reasoning for it.  If they were funding a grant for an astrophysics experiment, would you expect to have these kinds of benchmarks?  And don't go to the article and say that they are asking for timeframes, they gave Lou 2 years when he has had the best track record as any.  I see it as 2 years for any coach/GM when it takes longer to build an organization.

 

 

Exactly.  Do you really want a check with me system with a bunch of financiers when it comes to hockey?

 

1) JVB never won the cup as owner of the Devils from 2004-2013.  He was part of the YankeeNets consortium but he had a very small, non-controlling stake in that.

 

2) JVB went over Lou's head for Kovy, yet not a mention about that from you.

 

I think this is another example of people hating on the owners for perceived slights that do not exist just because they disagree with something else the owners did, usually something off-ice.  The new owners have given zero indication that they don't want to win and are willing to do whatever it takes to win.  They just don't want to spend foolishly.

[Jerzey]

I'd rather them say, "I want to do everything we can to win as soon as possible." Doesn't that sound better? I don't care that VBK was bankrupt; do you know why? WE GOT TO THE CUP! These owners need to not ask for justification for spending because they do not understand the reasoning for it. If they were funding a grant for an astrophysics experiment, would you expect to have these kinds of benchmarks? And don't go to the article and say that they are asking for timeframes, they gave Lou 2 years when he has had the best track record as any. I see it as 2 years for any coach/GM when it takes longer to build an organization.

Exactly. Do you really want a check with me system with a bunch of financiers when it comes to hockey?

Personally I don't mind it. The owners like statisticians and Lou doesn't. They can and should be a factor in free agency. Plus Lou has made a couple of questionable free agent signings and re-signings lately. I think it's a good last line of defense.

[themightyall]

1) JVB never won the cup as owner of the Devils from 2004-2013.  He was part of the YankeeNets consortium but he had a very small, non-controlling stake in that.

 

2) JVB went over Lou's head for Kovy, yet not a mention about that from you.

 

I think this is another example of people hating on the owners for perceived slights that do not exist just because they disagree with something else the owners did, usually something off-ice.  The new owners have given zero indication that they don't want to win and are willing to do whatever it takes to win.  They just don't want to spend foolishly.

 

1) Sorry, mistyped, Got, to a cup.

 

2)  Reference?

 

It's a matter of not buying into a new owner just because he's new.  They have to prove they are good, they aren't just good automatically.

 

 

Personally I don't mind it. The owners like statisticians and Lou doesn't. They can and should be a factor in free agency. Plus Lou has made a couple of questionable free agent signings and re-signings lately. I think it's a good last line of defense.

 

Lou doesn't mind it either.  I don't think that it's something that should be taken into account on it's own, which Lou said.  I don't even think that Tri would say that one should look at numbers on their own and that's it.

Edited May 26, 2015 by themightyall

[RunninWithTheDevil]

I'd rather them say, "I want to do everything we can to win as soon as possible."  Doesn't that sound better?  I don't care that VBK was bankrupt; do you know why?  WE GOT TO THE CUP!  These owners need to not ask for justification for spending because they do not understand the reasoning for it.  

 

First of all, that sounds better of course but thats just spoon feeding the fans what they want to hear.  We got to the cup yes but do you remember during those years?  Being worried that the team could be moved any day?  I want wins but I also need this team to be financially sound.  I'd like to take a grandkid or two to a Devils game.

[devilsrule33]

What I got from this, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that Lou and Shero will not be able to make any big moves without passing it by ownership first. In other words, if Lou and Shero try to trade for Kessel or something they have to check with the owners first.

 

If anything this is great news for a GM. They have time and can be patient to do things right. It's the opposite of when a rich owner says, "HERE'S MY MONEY, SPEND IT, SPEND IT, SPEND IT!  These owners don't want to be a cap team just to miss the playoffs, or even keep spending to the cap to barely make it.

 

If you are an owner, and your GM is hoping to be a cap team, their has to be a return on investment. If it can't be done, the team should be looking at another season or other ways they can improve, be it oversees players, or waiting until the next UFA period. Too many owners give GMs an open cheque book, even demanding they spend, when their simply isn't anything to spend on that will help the team greatly. 

 

If a GM wants Phil Kessel, the owners should be asking the right questions, and a GM better be willing to prove that giving up assets and spending this money will really help the team. 

Edited May 26, 2015 by devilsrule33

[themightyall]

First of all, that sounds better of course but thats just spoon feeding the fans what they want to hear.  We got to the cup yes but do you remember during those years?  Being worried that the team could be moved any day?  I want wins but I also need this team to be financially sound.  I'd like to take a grandkid or two to a Devils game.

 

And only Harris and Blitzer could do that?  The NHL want their teams to stay where they are.  If not them, then another owner would've come along.  And yes, it is spoon feeding.  I'd rather that and why I really liked Lou.  Nothing got out, nothing was leaked.  Now we know each coach that has been interviewed.  Elias used to be the biggest wildcard in speaking to the media but now he's the most rational:  "Whether it's I stay or go, I want to play for a team that wants me to play."  I'd rather hear that kind of stuff from the owner than:  "Unless they convince me of the effectiveness, I am not spending money."  There is too much to infer from that.  You guys may like it, but there is too much to read into that.

 

 

If anything this is great news for a GM. They have time and can be patient to do things right. It's the opposite of when a rich owner says, "HERE'S MY MONEY, SPEND IT, SPEND IT, SPEND IT!  These owners don't want to be a cap team just to miss the playoffs, or even keep spending to the cap to barely make it.

 

If you are a GM, and want to be a cap team, their has to be a return on investment. If it can't b done, the team should be looking at another season or other ways they can improve, be it oversees players, or waiting until the next UFA period. Too many owners give GMs an open cheque book, even demanding they spend, when their simply isn't anything to spend on that will help the team greatly. 

 

Or, possibly an in between.  Merely a, "don't be a drunken sailor, but make a winning team the best way you see fit."  That is the best because the owner is out of the way.  Why should an owner decide things?  He doesn't know anything about hockey.

Edited May 26, 2015 by themightyall

[Triumph]

And only Harris and Blitzer could do that?  The NHL want their teams to stay where they are.  If not them, then another owner would've come along.  And yes, it is spoon feeding.  I'd rather that and why I really liked Lou.  Nothing got out, nothing was leaked.  Now we know each coach that has been interviewed.  Elias used to be the biggest wildcard in speaking to the media but now he's the most rational:  "Whether it's I stay or go, I want to play for a team that wants me to play."  I'd rather hear that kind of stuff from the owner than:  "Unless they convince me of the effectiveness, I am not spending money."  There is too much to infer from that.  You guys may like it, but there is too much to read into that.

 

This 'nothing got leaked' when Lou was GM was utter hoo-ha.  Yes, the Devils were very good at keeping things a secret - no one had any idea that Cory Schneider was going to be a Devil.  But the Post had the fact that the Devils had made an enormous offer to Kovalchuk, Zidlicky said he would only waive his no-trade for the Devils, it was reported that Jagr took a tour of the Prudential Center 2 summers ago and then the Czech sources were reporting Jagr to NJ well before the actual signing - some things still got out.

 

 

Or, possibly an in between.  Merely a, "don't be a drunken sailor, but make a winning team the best way you see fit."  That is the best because the owner is out of the way.  Why should an owner decide things?  He doesn't know anything about hockey.

 

The owner is ultimately the person who decides things because he hires the GM, or he hires the team president who hires the GM.  Whatever the case, the overarching philosophy of the team comes from ownership.  If the GM has the idea that ownership is looking to fire him unless there's results soon, he will make moves to that effect, and those are not good moves to make.  The fact that the owners are relatively hands on while also spending money but also without being Steinbrenners about stuff is basically the perfect situation for the Devils to be in.  Now they just need a team.

[Devils Pride 26]

Owners unleash compelling new marketing plan for 2015/16

Edited May 26, 2015 by Devils Pride 26

[themightyall]

You're taking the straw man of this argument.  Picking the random points is hardly the generalities.  Especially because I'd like to see the article from the Post about the Kovy trade; I wasn't around the area to see the Post so I'd love to see how the Devils were in on the trade.  I know I don't get a lot of the speculation stuff because of that, so I'd always love to see when that happens because the national interpretation was very much the Devils came from "nowhere".  Zids and Jagr I heard about, but not Kovy.  But these are hardly the exceptions, not the rule.  The rule is most other organizations and far and away people will reference "Status Quo" rather than "Yeah, we knew Kovy was coming at the deadline" than any other team.

 

 

This 'nothing got leaked' when Lou was GM was utter hoo-ha.  Yes, the Devils were very good at keeping things a secret - no one had any idea that Cory Schneider was going to be a Devil.  But the Post had the fact that the Devils had made an enormous offer to Kovalchuk, Zidlicky said he would only waive his no-trade for the Devils, it was reported that Jagr took a tour of the Prudential Center 2 summers ago and then the Czech sources were reporting Jagr to NJ well before the actual signing - some things still got out.

 

 

 

 

 

The owner is ultimately the person who decides things because he hires the GM, or he hires the team president who hires the GM.  Whatever the case, the overarching philosophy of the team comes from ownership.  If the GM has the idea that ownership is looking to fire him unless there's results soon, he will make moves to that effect, and those are not good moves to make.  The fact that the owners are relatively hands on while also spending money but also without being Steinbrenners about stuff is basically the perfect situation for the Devils to be in.  Now they just need a team.

 

Owners are that but it's bad enough when players see a GM or coach that doesn't know "the way things are".  I'd much rather have an owner that does hire but does not then ask for constant updates and reasons to sign players.  They do not know how things work and should not be so knee jerk.  Again, Toronto is all the money in the world and do what you want but are too hands on.  I like Shanahan and Babcock (who couldn't) running things but all years previous is pretty obvious how that doesn't work out.

[Pepperkorn]

Mighty -- you're going against all that is Lou in fiscal responsibility just to make the owners out to be dipsh!ts.  Get your philosophy straight. Who can take anything that you write seriously when you're just being contrary?

 

Of course everyone is (taking you seriously)   ...so... what do I know?

 

Basically I kind of feel like they're letting fans know they're not going to go all wacked out buying the best team they can put together --

there will be no more Kovalchuk signings - there will be no throwing money at problems.

 

 

which is nice because I don't even remember ANY time you could really buy a whole team and get any real buy in from your players.

 

Everyone is seeking the winning philosophy within the Devils.  As I've been saying something is just terribly wrong with the concept of what a character player is.  Guys with undeniable character suck.  Guys spouting the right sound bites of course just suck.  Somehow the values are not being articulated within the organization.  Too much effort put into adapting?  All I know is looking at the Devils roster I dont thnk anyone can see the forest for the trees.  Some teams you can see - just bring in this piece just trade out that one.  For years now there have been no pieces available to the team.  Yeesh -- tons of action in this thread while I clack away without posting -- I hope to god it's not stupid mindless back and forth --  this message board's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

 

I can't stop thinking that line every time I read these goofy contrary threads

Edited May 26, 2015 by Pepperkorn

[William D'Aquila]

They're smart businessmen, they're not penny pinchers.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with what they said - it's pretty much what many of us have been saying for a while now.  They're willing to invest in the team if it's a smart decision that will allow the team to be successful..they're not just going to allow Lou / Shero to spend money carelessly.  

 

Throwing money at a couple middle-of-the-pack veterans isn't a smart investment, and won't solve any problems for the team going forward.

 

If they were smart businessmen, they shouldn't have purchased a sports team. Outside of the NFL, it is difficult to break even or make money, which I assume is their main goal. 

 

If this was the non salary cap era, I wouldn't be all that concerned with their comments, but post lockout there seems to be a correlation with money spent and on ice success. 

 

And you can bring up Blackstone, I know about Blackstone, I own the MLP, they are the Goldman Sachs of private equity, but this is different. The team is within the world of finance still, but this is as much about the heart as it is the head. 

Edited May 26, 2015 by William D'Aquila

[themightyall]

Mighty -- you're going against all that is Lou in fiscal responsibility just to make the owners out to be dipsh!ts.  Get your philosophy straight. Who can take anything that you write seriously when you're just being contrary?

 

Of course everyone is (taking you seriously)   ...so... what do I know?

 

Basically I kind of feel like they're letting fans know they're not going to go all wacked out buying the best team they can put together --

there will be no more Kovalchuk signings - there will be no throwing money at problems.

 

 

which is nice because I don't even remember ANY time you could really buy a whole team and get any real buy in from your players.

 

Everyone is seeking the winning philosophy within the Devils.  As I've been saying something is just terribly wrong with the concept of what a character player is.  Guys with undeniable character suck.  Guys spouting the right sound bites of course just suck.  Somehow the values are not being articulated within the organization.  Too much effort put into adapting?  All I know is looking at the Devils roster I dont thnk anyone can see the forest for the trees.  Some teams you can see - just bring in this piece just trade out that one.  For years now there have been no pieces available to the team.  Yeesh -- tons of action in this thread while I clack away without posting -- I hope to god it's not stupid mindless back and forth --  this message board's but a walking shadow, a poor player

That struts and frets his hour upon the stage

And then is heard no more: it is a tale

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing.

 

I can't stop thinking that line every time I read these goofy contrary threads

 

So Lou didn't spend a sh!t ton when he was winning cups?  Sure not Rangers, but he was definitely above what would be "the cap" at that time.

 

It's hard to put anything up on either side right now because we don't know where to go.  Some people put their trust in Lou (me and Will) some people put their trust in ownership (place name here).  Neither side knows what they are critiquing so far yet and that is why you are on the sidelines.

 

Full of sound and fury signifying nothing.  It's nothing because we are waiting for facts to argue.  It'd be great to just have everything "formulated, sprawling on a pin" (in your poetic sense) but we won't have that for years because not even Harris or Shero have those answers.  I know everyone will call me archaic or "knowing the devil you do know than the one you don't" by saying I wish Lou were around, but I don't.  I just want a unified path.  Let the owners own, the GM manage, the coaches coach, and the players play.  Lou used to have that down (except maybe the coaches coach).  But I just don't like hearing the owners take another hat just because they have some numbers that justify it.  Maybe it means something to laymen, but it can mean more to others that know the game.

Edited May 26, 2015 by themightyall

[DevsMan84]

1) Sorry, mistyped, Got, to a cup.

2) Reference?

It's a matter of not buying into a new owner just because he's new. They have to prove they are good, they aren't just good automatically.

Lou doesn't mind it either. I don't think that it's something that should be taken into account on it's own, which Lou said. I don't even think that Tri would say that one should look at numbers on their own and that's it.

Here is the reference for JVB being behind the kovy contract.

http://fireandice.northjersey.com/mobile/fire-ice-1.174987/devils-gm-lou-lamoriello-admits-kovalchuk-contract-shouldn-t-be-part-of-nhl-1.95545

[William D'Aquila]

Here is the reference for JVB being behind the kovy contract.

http://fireandice.northjersey.com/mobile/fire-ice-1.174987/devils-gm-lou-lamoriello-admits-kovalchuk-contract-shouldn-t-be-part-of-nhl-1.95545

 

You are spot on when it comes to this. I believe Lou even sent Burke to testify against the contact during the arbitration hearing. 

 

If I remember correctly, Larry Brooks was of the same opinion.