Daniel Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 yeah, just saw it on ESPN's bottom line, Burnside saying Lou was aware of the rejection before the press conference. Of course, that's if you believe Burnside's "sources" Gilutti, who to me seems to be on the up and up, said he had sources that said more or less the same thing as Burnside. As much of a jagoff as Burnside is, it looks like he's right on this one. There's nothing wrong with this though unless Lou withheld what he knew from Grossman. (I hate to sound like a broken record on this point, but, without any hyperbole, it could mark the moment when the franchise went into the wilderness for a very long time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie McKraut Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 this is still fvcking team goddamnit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge18 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Gilutti, who to me seems to be on the up and up, said he had sources that said more or less the same thing as Burnside. As much of a jagoff as Burnside is, it looks like he's right on this one. There's nothing wrong with this though unless Lou withheld what he knew from Grossman. (I hate to sound like a broken record on this point, but, without any hyperbole, it could mark the moment when the franchise went into the wilderness for a very long time). Regarding when Lou knew it would be rejected. Gulitti clarified his first statement about monday night. His twitter feed now says that the Devils were aware that the league was leaning towards rejection as of monday. Despite this the formal notification of the contract's rejection did not take place until tuesday night. http://twitter.com/TGfireandice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilgriffey84 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I hope all this sh!t doesnt cause us to lose kovy.....I hate being uncertain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilgriffey84 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Great article Nhl may have picked the wrong fight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devils26 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I'm not familiar with what's exactly in the CBA besides what's described here or by sports writers. (I'm admittedly too lazy to go through the whole thing). I haven't heard anyone mention the provision you cited, so I'll assume that for whatever reason it doesn't apply here. To answer your second question, as a practical matter I would think a renegotiated deal could be reached between the club and the player and approved by the league at any time before a decision by an arbitrator or whoever is made. Again, it would be akin to a settlement which in the real world can be reached at any time. That's what I thought too, that a new deal could be created to avoid the arbitration...in fact the rule I posted seems to suggest it. But I agree with you, that since I haven't heard any sportswriters mention the clause I posted it doesn't apply for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilgriffey84 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 That's what I thought too, that a new deal could be created to avoid the arbitration...in fact the rule I posted seems to suggest it. But I agree with you, that since I haven't heard any sportswriters mention the clause I posted it doesn't apply for some reason. I think pride is a factor basically the nhl is putting its foot down on the devils when they had the oppurtunity to do it with the other contracts. Also how can you allow the stanley cup champions blackhawks and the Phailures who were the runner up get there contracts passed. This is an uneven playing field in my mind. if the hawks and phailures along with numerous other clubs were allowed to make the same deals who is the nhl to say that the devils cant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpower Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 it's not really the same contract though. the Devils had a chance to put the same contract out there, but they dragged it out 2 years longer for some unknown reason. this is basically a combination of all of these whacky deals stretched out to maximum length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilgriffey84 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 it's not really the same contract though. the Devils had a chance to put the same contract out there, but they dragged it out 2 years longer for some unknown reason. this is basically a combination of all of these whacky deals stretched out to maximum length. kovy wants to play until he is 44 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOLLYWOOD Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Well, since the planet knows the entire details of the Devils/Kovy contract... Now this from Helen Elliott of the LA Times I still say this is all the greatest publicity stunt in NHL history. The media is running with it full speed. http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-nhl-kovalchuk-20100722,0,4820847.story Kings would be interested in resuming pursuit of Ilya Kovalchuk The Kings could again try to sign the forward if his 17-year, $102-million contract with New Jersey is invalidated on the grounds that it circumvents the league's salary cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOLLYWOOD Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 LA Kings looking to make a deal. Montreal Gazette reports... http://www.montrealgazette.com/sports/Making+deal+with+Devils/3307473/story.html Making a deal with the Devils The Devils acquired Kovalchuk in a mid-season trade with the Atlanta Thrashers last season and along with the Los Angeles Kings have courted him since free agency began July 1. Kings general manager Dean Lombardi told the team's website his club would still be interested in signing Kovalchuk if the deal with the Devils falls through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSkirt Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 All is well. The NHL simply fired a salvo across the bow of the GMs fully knowing they will not win in arbitration. On the longshot the NHL does win, the contract would be tweaked such that the NHL could not reject it again. I have full confidence that #17 will be here for quite some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RolandNJD Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 All is well. The NHL simply fired a salvo across the bow of the GMs fully knowing they will not win in arbitration. On the longshot the NHL does win, the contract would be tweaked such that the NHL could not reject it again. I have full confidence that #17 will be here for quite some time. Here's hoping. I thought maybe this was a blessing... I mean talk to us in 10 years and we might not even want any part of Kovalchuk. But I'm all for it now, and I don't understand why the NHL would take it out on New Jersey, and not start at the Hossa contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejaentendu2101 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 LA Kings looking to make a deal. Montreal Gazette reports... http://www.montrealgazette.com/sports/Making+deal+with+Devils/3307473/story.html Making a deal with the Devils Oh no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrthemike Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 fvckin Kings.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagknife Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I'm confident he returns even if the contract gets voided in arbitration. His comments tuesday at the press conference alone locked him in here. If he goes elsewhere at this point, it would create not only a fan backlash, but it would be a PR nightmare for him for the rest of his career. Every game, every mistake, every detail of his play would come into question and he would also could be looked upon as a fraud for saying so many things that made him seem dedicated to one team, and then for him to turn around and bolt just because the original contract was rejected by some fat midget who cant see over the steering wheel of his own car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amberite Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) Dean Lombardi is the biggest GM in the league. He doesn't know when to shut his mouth. I wouldn't take too much stock in them saying that they would be interested in Kovy again. Of course they're interested - Kovy abandoned them, Gagne signed in with Tampa, and he has droves of fans outside his office with pitchforks. I'm also interested in winning Mega Millions this Friday. Edited July 22, 2010 by Amberite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) Great article Nhl may have picked the wrong fight Yeah makes you think -- will the NHL reject any Islanders contract for circumventing the floor? I'm confident he returns even if the contract gets voided in arbitration. His comments tuesday at the press conference alone locked him in here. If he goes elsewhere at this point, it would create not only a fan backlash, but it would be a PR nightmare for him for the rest of his career. Every game, every mistake, every detail of his play would come into question and he would also could be looked upon as a fraud for saying so many things that made him seem dedicated to one team, and then for him to turn around and bolt just because the original contract was rejected by some fat midget who cant see over the steering wheel of his own car. Yeah - until the next moron comes along -- next off-season probably. Only Devils fans will feel that way long term. Edited July 22, 2010 by Pepperkorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) That's what I thought too, that a new deal could be created to avoid the arbitration...in fact the rule I posted seems to suggest it. But I agree with you, that since I haven't heard any sportswriters mention the clause I posted it doesn't apply for some reason. If I were representing the Devils organization, I wouldn't even think of suggesting a new deal to Kovalchuk. It's his job to come back and say - Look, can we re-structure this thing and see what happens? Even if I'd want to give the NHL the big fvck you and fight to the death, it's all about what Kovalchuk wants, not the organization, THAT is what good faith negotiating is about. The whole claim is that the Devils were NOT negotiating in good faith. They were though - it's always been in Kovalchuk's court. That's one of the reason I like that he is on record as saying he wanted 17 years because it's his number - his dad died on the 17th. It has genuine significance to him. Even if it's a line it was HIS call not the organizations therefore NOT a bad-faith request on NJ's part. Basically bottom line: If the Devils look to do anything other than follow Kovalchuk's lead it's proof positive of bad faith negotiation - if not before the rejection then it most certainly would be after the fact, And that is NOT the Devils way. Edited July 22, 2010 by Pepperkorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 If I were representing the Devils organization, I wouldn't even think of suggesting a new deal to Kovalchuk. It's his job to come back and say - Look, can we re-structure this thing and see what happens? Even if I'd want to give the NHL the big fvck you and fight to the death, it's all about what Kovalchuk wants, not the organization, THAT is what good faith negotiating is about. The whole claim is that the Devils were NOT negotiating in good faith. They were though - it's always been in Kovalchuk's court. That's one of the reason I like that he is on record as saying he wanted 17 years because it's his number - his dad died on the 17th. It has genuine significance to him. Even if it's a line it was HIS call not the organizations therefore NOT a bad-faith request on NJ's part. Basically bottom line: If the Devils look to do anything other than follow Kovalchuk's lead it's proof positive of bad faith negotiation - if not before the rejection then it most certainly would be after the fact, And that is NOT the Devils way. I agree with this completely. Well said, PK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) I also really feel for the journalists out there ... or sports writer - its a tough job if you're a Devils fan. Lou cannot say certain things. These guys have to get out the message in competitive time or risk not being listened to. and sometimes they get the intent wrong. Lou cannot spell out his intent because that's far too specific. He has to paint with broad strokes and he's got to find the journalist who knows the Ineffable System well enough to translate the message. I had the feel of it yesterdays but it was all too much. It was too much because I didn't get the hidden message from Lou's insinuations before the contract was rejected. Lou was unclear in fact - but he had it in his head what he was getting at... dope. I suspect that was over thinking to the point of missing that middle step - that they had a heads up the contract might be rejected but didn't take much stock in it because it's a standard message that goes out to all teams that must cross some line NHL has set out but hasn't communicated - because they can't because it's illegal in the CBA basically instigating collusion. Yes yes -- all the pieces are just falling perfectly into place for me. I'm massively pissed I didn't get this right off the bat - we could have helped TG get the message straight. PuckDaddy could have spun it all out correctly from the start. But I ... I dont know if even I can get it all out properly now - what's so clear -- generally though, once I get it, the whole world has too so.... now it's re-spinning, rewinding and putting it all back the way Lou intended... (of course I knwo it's just the way I see things but I love to think I see them the Devils way ) TRAUMA! Edited July 22, 2010 by Pepperkorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 If I were representing the Devils organization, I wouldn't even think of suggesting a new deal to Kovalchuk. It's his job to come back and say - Look, can we re-structure this thing and see what happens? Even if I'd want to give the NHL the big fvck you and fight to the death, it's all about what Kovalchuk wants, not the organization, THAT is what good faith negotiating is about. The whole claim is that the Devils were NOT negotiating in good faith. They were though - it's always been in Kovalchuk's court. That's one of the reason I like that he is on record as saying he wanted 17 years because it's his number - his dad died on the 17th. It has genuine significance to him. Even if it's a line it was HIS call not the organizations therefore NOT a bad-faith request on NJ's part. Basically bottom line: If the Devils look to do anything other than follow Kovalchuk's lead it's proof positive of bad faith negotiation - if not before the rejection then it most certainly would be after the fact, And that is NOT the Devils way. i didn't think of it like this, but you're absolutely right. it has to be kind of terrifying for lou and company to be in such a position, but their move should be no move at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubanjd305 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 When do the 120 hours to file grievance start from? Tuesday night or when the NHL announced it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevil26 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 This puts a ton of pressure on Kovalchuk. If it turns out the way I'm thinking it will... having the press conference knowing the contract was going to get rejected was GENIUS. Now it's up to Kovy to live by his word. He said he wanted to be here and he said it's not about the money. So he's got two options. He can either go to Lou and say "We can change this deal and make it acceptable to the leauge." Or he can agree to fight the hell out of his contract to make sure it's accepted by the arbitrator. Lou's done a great job so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelastonealive Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Well, at least it's not boring. Hell, it's almost like not having an offseason at all! This ridiculousness has made summer WAY more tolerable than usual. In a weird painful sorta way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts