Friedman: I wonder if Montreal lands Kovalchuk

[hockeyheadlines]

I would die if Radulov snubbed them. He might go to Vegas so he can play alongside fellow countryman, Shipachyov. I read that Radu is recently single again and what better place for a rich bachelor than Viva Las Vegas, Baby!

Plan your pre-funeral yet?

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

I doubt it. The reason SJ, STL, and TOR are possible destinations for him is that those teams all have staff with whom Kovalchuk is acquainted (SJ = Peter DeBoer; former Devils coach, STL = Martin Brodeur; former Devils teammate, and TOR = Lou Lamiorello; former Devils GM).

There is no one in the Montreal Canadiens organization with whom Kovalchuk has special relations. In fact, Alexander Radulov doesn't want him in the team; I forgot the reason for it.

 

[hockeyheadlines]

I doubt it. The reason SJ, STL, and TOR are possible destinations for him is that those teams all have staff with whom Kovalchuk is acquainted (SJ = Peter DeBoer; former Devils coach, STL = Martin Brodeur; former Devils teammate, and TOR = Lou Lamiorello; former Devils GM).

There is no one in the Montreal Canadiens organization with whom Kovalchuk has special relations. In fact, Alexander Radulov doesn't want him in the team; I forgot the reason for it.

Forgot the reason? Try to remember, this is important man!

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Forgot the reason? Try to remember, this is important man!

It just says he "lobbied for a Kovalchuk signing". No detailed reason, as far as I know.
(Source: THN: The Big Three; Page 11)

 

[hockeyheadlines]

It just says he "lobbied for a Kovalchuk signing". No detailed reason, as far as I know.
(Source: THN: The Big Three; Page 11)

I think you misunderstand the meaning of lobbied...

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

I think you misunderstand the meaning of lobbied...

Okay, fair enough.

 

[Foltronic]

Okay, fair enough.

Is that you Jim?

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Is that you Jim?

Jim Benning? Nah, he's worse.

 

[Miller Time]

Pacioretty, Emelin
for
Kovalchuk, Henrique, Moore

 

[Eric Sachs]

Pacioretty, Emelin
for
Kovalchuk, Henrique, Moore

Pass. We need to move our expendable assets to improve our D, not make it worse.

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Pacioretty, Emelin
for
Kovalchuk, Henrique, Moore

Easy pass.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

Nope it's already been reported that 2017 picks can't be used, You can't deal that pick until the contract is signed and that wont be until at least July 1st and once again the draft is over by then.

The thing to understand about Kovy's return is that it's ultimately up to the say so of the Commissioner. Now, I'm sure Bettman has leaked to the press what you're hearing now about how it works (if you recall the story has changed over time).

But I imagine, after the expansion draft but before the entry draft, the Devils and a team that wants Kovalchuk and who has already worked out a contract with him could go to Bettman and get his approval for a trade of a 2017 pick in exchange for "future considerations." Bettman may or may not approve it, but there's very little reason for him not to.

 

[Eric Sachs]

The thing to understand about Kovy's return is that it's ultimately up to the say so of the Commissioner. Now, I'm sure Bettman has leaked to the press what you're hearing now about how it works (if you recall the story has changed over time).

But I imagine, after the expansion draft but before the entry draft, the Devils and a team that wants Kovalchuk and who has already worked out a contract with him could go to Bettman and get his approval for a trade of a 2017 pick in exchange for "future considerations." Bettman may or may not approve it, but there's very little reason for him not to.

No, it's not. It's up to the NHL's by-laws discussing VRL players, which cannot be amended by the commissioner alone. It's up to the CBA discussing players who are able to sign a contract after the playing year is done, which cannot be amended by the commissioner alone.

Future considerations (defined in the NHL by-laws) also cannot be something like this.

Kovalchuk won't be moved for 2017 picks.

 

[vokiel]

I wonder if Friedman knows the concept of click baiting. (of course he does)

 

[Setec Astronomy]

No, it's not. It's up to the NHL's by-laws discussing VRL players, which cannot be amended by the commissioner alone. It's up to the CBA discussing players who are able to sign a contract after the playing year is done, which cannot be amended by the commissioner alone.

Future considerations (defined in the NHL by-laws) also cannot be something like this.

Kovalchuk won't be moved for 2017 picks.

The by-laws say that their interpretation is left to the sole discretion of the Commissioner and is not subject to review by a court or arbitrator. The by-laws say contradictory things about how Kovy's return works, and nothing about whether he could be considered "future considerations" in a deal like I suggested.

Now someone in the commissioner's office has probably told the press that he can't be traded for a 2017 pick. But as long as it's not a ploy to circumvent some other rule, I think the Commissioner might reverse course.

 

[Eric Sachs]

The by-laws say that their interpretation is left to the sole discretion of the Commissioner and is not subject to review by a court or arbitrator. The by-laws say contradictory things about how Kovy's return works, and nothing about whether he could be considered "future considerations" in a deal like I suggested.

Now someone in the commissioner's office has probably told the press that he can't be traded for a 2017 pick. But as long as it's not a ploy to circumvent some other rule, I think the Commissioner might reverse course.

Interpretation, not drafting of new rules or changing old ones.

The by-laws likely don't say anything contradictory about players coming off VRL. What's more likely is that we don't have a full copy of the by-laws available as the only one on the internet is both incomplete and hard to read.

Future considerations cannot include any guarantee of future transactions, that is expressly prohibited by the CBA. You cannot have a trade that happens today that requires a future move to make it complete. You can have conditions.. but not "we do this now and then in two weeks, you do that".

Kovalchuk won't be traded until July 1st and no 2017 picks will be included. All of the media is saying that. All of the logic from reading the CBA and what we have of the by-laws says that.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

Interpretation, not drafting of new rules or changing old ones.

The by-laws likely don't say anything contradictory about players coming off VRL. What's more likely is that we don't have a full copy of the by-laws available as the only one on the internet is both incomplete and hard to read.

Future considerations cannot include any guarantee of future transactions, that is expressly prohibited by the CBA. You cannot have a trade that happens today that requires a future move to make it complete. You can have conditions.. but not "we do this now and then in two weeks, you do that".

Kovalchuk won't be traded until July 1st and no 2017 picks will be included. All of the media is saying that. All of the logic from reading the CBA and what we have of the by-laws says that.

The CBA is largely irrelevant here because it ultimately requires a grievance from the PA to challenge something the Commissioner is inclined to allow. Since the PA wouldn't have a dog in that fight I doubt it cares one way or the other.

The by-laws I have seen were filed in federal court and are complete and legible. They say various things about how a player can come back off the VRL that contradict themselves, probably because they were drafted at a time when no one thought that desirable players would want to play outside the NHL. Remember when everyone was saying he would have to sit out for an entire year if he wanted to come back. That's in the by-laws as is the proviosn that says he can come back to the Devils pretty much immediately. Bettman could have easily gone with the former instead of the latter. Same way he could reverse course on the 2017 draft pick issue if in fact he's actually said anything like that.

 

[Flair Hay]

If there's one obvious cantidate for GM due for another panic move it's Bergeron.

 

[Prairie Habs]

If there's one obvious cantidate for GM due for another panic move it's Bergeron.

MB has nerves of steal, just look at his TDL moves. Steals Vanek one year, steals Petry the next, generally just solid low high risk mid-high reward moves. This past season he was looking to make a big move for a 1C but the right deal wasn't there so he didn't force anything.

I know you are obviously referring to the Subban deal but that wasn't a panic move, it was just poor judgement.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

If there's one obvious cantidate for GM due for another panic move it's Bergeron.

There aren't any gms in the league named Bergeron

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

If there's one obvious cantidate for GM due for another panic move it's Bergeron.

Bergevin you mean.

 

[morgan_mtl]

I doubt it. The reason SJ, STL, and TOR are possible destinations for him is that those teams all have staff with whom Kovalchuk is acquainted (SJ = Peter DeBoer; former Devils coach, STL = Martin Brodeur; former Devils teammate, and TOR = Lou Lamiorello; former Devils GM).

There is no one in the Montreal Canadiens organization with whom Kovalchuk has special relations. In fact, Alexander Radulov doesn't want him in the team; I forgot the reason for it.

Might be wrong but was Rick Dudley the GM of Atlanta when Kovachuk was their star player?

 

[Prairie Habs]

Might be wrong but was Rick Dudley the GM of Atlanta when Kovachuk was their star player?

Nope. Dudley came on about 2 months after Kovy was traded.

I don't think it matters though. Kovy is 34 years old and an 11 NHL vet, I'm not sure why we are going with the narrative that he is a lost child at the store and he is looking for a grown up he recognizes.