As much as Devils' fans may be upset, the possibility Kovalchuk could decide to go back and play in the KHL at some point was there from day one. It's better it happens now as it gets exponentially more expensive if it were to happen later.
I was never in favor of the Kings signing Kovalchuk.
I don't understand why the Devils will have to pay only $300,000 per year. Why not have them pay nothing but keep the full cap hit on the books? Maybe the didn't know he was going to back out of the deal so soon after he signed it, but they had to know he would at some point. That's why most of it is paid up front. The risks of signing any player to a long term contract is that he's not going to fulfill it. But if he's allowed to just walk away & they void his contract and all it costs is a measly (in comparison) $300,000 a year then where's the risk?
Steve Politi, Star-Ledger (7/11/13)
Lou Lamoriello spent weeks trying to talk his superstar out of breaking his commitment to the Devils – and that, in itself, had to eat away at his soul.
This is a man who built an entire franchise around character and loyalty, one who loves to tell people that the team logo is on the front of the jersey and the name is on the back for a reason. Anyone who has spent time around him understand that this is not an act. He lives and breathes this stuff.
Now, here he was, trying to convince a player who signed a 15-year contract worth $100 million not to run back to Russia?
And not to do it just three years into that deal?
“I’ll let you answer that,” Lamoriello said when asked if he could take any positives away from his experience with Ilya Kovalchuk, and we’ll take that as a big, fat, resounding no.
My lord, to think if we would have signed him to that insane contract we certainly wold have had to trade Brown away, likely would never have got Carter, would have been in terrible cap shape and then would have a cap hit for the next decade. If we would have signed him, the Kings franchise would never have progressed, it would have been the same old ****.
I guess, though, it's unfortunate we didn't sign him for this forum, because then the Kings could have gone and brought in some broken down players with the left over money. Just another reminder of how nice it is to have a core of players over being at the whim of the free agent market.
Also, on Roedick: He's a turd. He DID nothing for the Kings and got money. IK at least got his team to the finals. Maybe that's not worth the $25 million he got paid over the last few years but still...yet somehow IK is a bad guy for retiring? I don't get it. Seems to me a lot better than loafing the next 10 years and getting paid for it. Roedick...hell...he should have retired in 2003...and did us and his "unfit" skates a favor.
I agree and I'm sure you remember how opposed to signing him I was. But there are some folks who were disappointed and THOSE people are just now realizing we dodged something.Quote:
As to the Kings "dodging" this. To me, it was evident they "dodged" it on June 11, 2012 not now. If IK had retired on the Kings it would mean the same thing...the Kings wouldn't be paying out the money. So I don't get this one either.
It's just how the cba works. Players who retire after 35 screw their teams. Players who retire before don't.
Bryce Salvador / Marek Zidlicky
Andy Greene / Adam Larsson
Anton Volchenkov / Mark Fayne
Lou is a genius. Smartest GM in the NHL. No question. But that is not anywhere close to being a playoff team. Does Lou have it in him to rebuild at this point in his career? Doubtful.
I see the loss of the first rounder next year, especially now that it very possibly is going to be a lottery pick as being the most damaging thing to that franchise.