David Puddy Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 You can't use Hossa or Pronger. They play for Bettman approved teams. Ha. Pronger really doesn't work because he's on a 35+ contract, meaning the cap hit stays if he retires or is sent down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 My link Hradek claiming he has a source that says Devils knew of NHL's decision before the press conference. If true, and wasn't shared with Grossman, this is not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim777 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 When we had a "how many pages will the Kovy thread get to" thread, I said 320. Just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 My link Hradek claiming he has a source that says Devils knew of NHL's decision before the press conference. If true, and wasn't shared with Grossman, this is not good. hradek also claims that scott burnside's reporting is terrific. so yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim777 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 My link Hradek claiming he has a source that says Devils knew of NHL's decision before the press conference. If true, and wasn't shared with Grossman, this is not good. If the NHL had actually made a decision, then why did they wait until after 10:00 PM Tuesday to leak it to a Canadian TV station? I'm calling shenanigans on that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) Isn't he over at North Star? Sorry, a Fargo reference cannot go unrecognized. damn it, i knew i was getting it wrong but was too lazy to google. should've talked to old Bill Diehl first. Edited July 21, 2010 by Triumph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeDev Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 its making me disgusted that ppl are saying la and rangers are going after kovy... that the rangers would trade gaborik to the kings just so they can make room for kovy... this all seems like the nhl is just tryin to stop the devils from ever winning anything ever again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 damn it, i knew i was getting it wrong but was too lazy to google. should've talked to old Bill Diehl first. Any of you guys got an extra pair of tickets to the Gophers game this weekend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmajeski06 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 My link Hradek claiming he has a source that says Devils knew of NHL's decision before the press conference. If true, and wasn't shared with Grossman, this is not good. I call BS. Why would the Devils role out the press conference fully knowing that in a matter of hours they would end up looking bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSC Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 its making me disgusted that ppl are saying la and rangers are going after kovy... that the rangers would trade gaborik to the kings just so they can make room for kovy... this all seems like the nhl is just tryin to stop the devils from ever winning anything ever again Well the "people" saying that are Єklund (2.3% accurate), Єklund (2.3% accurate), and possibly Єklund (2.3% accurate)'s dog (though that may just be Єklund (2.3% accurate) practicing his ventriloquism), so I wouldn't really worry about Kovalchuk going to the Rangers, or anyone else for that matter. Even if the NHL's decision stands with an arbitrator (and I don't think it would, but that's just my opinion), I think Kovy and the Devils will rework the contract to the standards set by the arbitrator and that will be the end of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 If the NHL had actually made a decision, then why did they wait until after 10:00 PM Tuesday to leak it to a Canadian TV station? I'm calling shenanigans on that point. The deal wasn't registered until Monday night, so there wasn't anything for the NHL to officially act on, till at least Tuesday morning. Also, the league had five days to approve, so certainly wasn't under any legal obligation to announce the decision asap. And it isn't the league's responsibility to warn Lou ahead of time of the consequences of doing a press conference if he knew what the decision would be ahead of time, or to do that, in effect, by rejecting the deal on Tuesday morning. True, the NHL website was trumpeting the deal all day Tuesday, but I seriously doubt that the front office people are coordinating with the marketing people. This is the NHL you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sickman Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) My link Hradek claiming he has a source that says Devils knew of NHL's decision before the press conference. If true, and wasn't shared with Grossman, this is not good. Lou would never do something like that. He is not a big enough idiot to do that and it's just not the way he does business. He may have known that it could possibly be rejected but I just can't see him doing that to Kovalchuk, his agent and the Devils. There is just no way he would do something in such poor taste. Fvck espn though and their bullsh!t sources. I'm sick of that pos Burnside. The man is grade A trash. He has an agenda with this team and will stop at nothing to make them look bad. Edited July 21, 2010 by Sickman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Well the "people" saying that are Єklund (2.3% accurate), Єklund (2.3% accurate), and possibly Єklund (2.3% accurate)'s dog (though that may just be Єklund (2.3% accurate) practicing his ventriloquism), so I wouldn't really worry about Kovalchuk going to the Rangers, or anyone else for that matter. Even if the NHL's decision stands with an arbitrator (and I don't think it would, but that's just my opinion), I think Kovy and the Devils will rework the contract to the standards set by the arbitrator and that will be the end of it. To be fair I think Єklund (2.3% accurate)'s Dog has a higher accuracy rate. Burnside did mention that he talked with someone who has experience with these matters and that person said the NHL doesn't have much of a case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Lou would never do something like that. He is not a big enough idiot to do that and it's just not the way he does business. He may have known that it could possibly be rejected but I just can't see him doing that to Kovalchukm his agent and the Devils. There is just no way. Fvck espn though and their bullsh!t sources. I'm sick of that pos Burnside. The man is grade A trash. He has an agenda with this team and will stop at nothing to make them look bad. This whole thing has been so crazy that you can't discount anything that isn't Єklund (2.3% accurate). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 even if, and we're assuming a ton here, lou did that, he did it with full confidence that he's going to beat the NHL in this thing. and he might. the NHL might've rejected it just to say to the rest of the NHL, it's time to knock it off, if you want you and your player to go through a bunch of hassle just to get your precious front-loaded contract, just try it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prucenterrules Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Lou just get this fixed already. I don't see how the NHL can possibly beat the NHLPA in court with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightingMongoose Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Page 316: For Lou so loved the team, he gave his only cap, so that whoever believes in him will not perish, but eventually go through a lengthy arbitration process. Amen. Amen, brother. May I put this in my sig? Properly credited of course. Slightly more on topic: While I think we have a wee bit of a persecution complex here I believe the flurry of negative activity among other team's fans is showing that there is at least a little resentment against the Devils organization. We fly under the radar until we're 1st place and manage to get into the playoffs every year, draft well, trade well, sign well (with notable exceptions) without having a 30+ year history (in NJ anyway), mass market, being Canadian, or being an underdog feel-good story, and frequently frustrating the "this could be our year" dreams of fans of teams that fit those descriptions. I'm not saying this is the attitude of the NHL or motivated this decision. I'll leave that to others to say and point out the evidence. But I find this sudden anti-Devils outpouring amusing. It's sparked a furious side of my Devils fandom that's laid dormant after too much pushover gameplay. I want to see that fury in the players, I want the rest of the league to fear us. I don't care how this "war" ends really... I'm ready for 82+ wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 even if, and we're assuming a ton here, lou did that, he did it with full confidence that he's going to beat the NHL in this thing. and he might. the NHL might've rejected it just to say to the rest of the NHL, it's time to knock it off, if you want you and your player to go through a bunch of hassle just to get your precious front-loaded contract, just try it. If he did this with full confidence that he'd win in arbitration, than it's a good bet that the first stages of dementia are settling in. Arbitration, especially where no similar case has been brought before an arbitrator before, is about as unpredictable as it can get. So long as the arbitrator has some justification for ruling for the NHL (no matter how poorly reasoned) the arbitrator's decision stands. It would be an enormous gamble that risks seriously undermining the credibility of the organization. This would be the sort of thing that causes a revolt from the other limited partners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 even if, and we're assuming a ton here, lou did that, he did it with full confidence that he's going to beat the NHL in this thing. and he might. the NHL might've rejected it just to say to the rest of the NHL, it's time to knock it off, if you want you and your player to go through a bunch of hassle just to get your precious front-loaded contract, just try it. Of course, if Lou wins the precedent has been set for any contract slightly lower than Kovy's until the CBA expires. A similarly structured contract for 16 years at 96 million would go right through because the NHL already lost once. It's a risk by the NHL to challenge it is what I'm trying to say. If they allowed it with a warning, it may atleast scare off a few GM's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 If he did this with full confidence that he'd win in arbitration, than it's a good bet that the first stages of dementia are settling in. Arbitration, especially where no similar case has been brought before an arbitrator before, is about as unpredictable as it can get. So long as the arbitrator has some justification for ruling for the NHL (no matter how poorly reasoned) the arbitrator's decision stands. It would be an enormous gamble that risks seriously undermining the credibility of the organization. This would be the sort of thing that causes a revolt from the other limited partners. and yet you still believe that it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 and yet you still believe that it happened. I wouldn't say I believe it happened, but at the same time it is a possibility that worries me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 My idea is that the NHL did this specifically to head to arbitration to finally put an end to these types of contracts. if the NHL does lose out then the CBA expires soon so there is no harm/no foul. In addition if the NHL loses then this whole fiasco will serve as a warning to other GMs of the headaches they will encounter if they try and make similar deals. So I suppose if the arbitrator rules in favor of the NHL Hossa, Pronger, Keith, Luongo etc, all those deals are voided or I suppose the re is no retroactivity applied to the ruling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgosha21 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Alright if you compare Kovy's deal to Hossa's, Hossa is making only 1 million in the last few years of his current deal & Kovy is making $550,000 in his last few years. The Devils should just bump the contract up to 104.5 million that way he would make at least 1 million the last few years same as Hossa, I mean the cap hit per year would be 6.2 million over the 17 years. At this point what is the difference in 200k more. Just get it done!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv4Life Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 There's a huge difference between a possibility and knowing that they would reject it. Don't take biased ESPN "reporters" seriously. And lol,what "source"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 My idea is that the NHL did this specifically to head to arbitration to finally put an end to these types of contracts. if the NHL does lose out then the CBA expires soon so there is no harm/no foul. In addition if the NHL loses then this whole fiasco will serve as a warning to other GMs of the headaches they will encounter if they try and make similar deals. So I suppose if the arbitrator rules in favor of the NHL Hossa, Pronger, Keith, Luongo etc, all those deals are voided or I suppose the re is no retroactivity applied to the ruling? No retroactivity. Those deals are not going anywhere save a new CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts