Kovalchuk and Klee for Michalek, Couture, McLaren, Lukowich
View Single Post
09-14-2008, 07:19 AM
Join Date: Aug 2006
Originally Posted by
First, Pens "always" had a bright future?
Did life begin in 2005?
Second, please clarfiy. Are you suggesting that it would be wise for Atlanta to move Kovo
even if they can re-sign him
If you do, I'm exiting stage right on this conversation. You BUILD around a superstar of his pedigree, not trade him. And in today's parity-induced NHL, a team can rebuild on the fly.
I'm just not ready to ASSume that Kovo will want out. The thread starter does. And the vultures dive in. That's cool. But when Kovo re-signs, will they admit the errors of their ways, as they didn't when Lecavalier, Malkin,
, re-signed their respective teams never gave a moment's though to moving them, despite the pages of baseless, ridiculous speculation here? Just wondering.
It's instructive, sometimes, to learn from history. And "history" under this current CBA usggests that teams don't let superstars walk.
To be sure, there are exceptions to every rule. But that is what this thread is based upon. And when it is put forth as "fact" -
"Let's pull our heads out of the sand and face the harsh reality that Atlanta is in no position to try and keep Kovalchuk in two years when he becomes UFA."
- a reality check is in order.
Bottom line: it would be asinine for Atlanta to even consider moving him at this point.
"The world may end in two years! Better make a panic move now! Chicken Littles unite!"
I'm not even a Thrashers fans, but best to spare them the thinly-veiled self-centered advice to move their franchise player,
under contract for fully another two years
, in September '08. It serves them NO PURPOSE whatsoever.
Just my opinion.
Well, considering Malkin and Crosby only started playing after 2005, it's not exactly like the pre-05 team matters to them, does it?
As for trading Kovalchuk, it probably isn't a good idea. Why? Partly because of what you mentioned, although that didn't seem to stop Florida did it? More importantly, though, it's because Atlanta absolutely won't get the value people are expecting. You make it sound like Kovalchuk in Atlanta is written in stone, though, but it isn't. Fact is, there is a possibility he might want out. At that point, they won't be getting full value for him. The way I see it, there are actually 3 possibilities, the third one being the one I prefer:
(1) Option number 1 involves Waddell wooing Kovalchuk with promises of rainbows and lollipops. Kovalchuk re-signs, and they keep rebuilding.
(2) Option 2 involves Kovalchuk balking at Waddell and demanding a trade. At this point, they won't be getting the Michalek+Marleau+Couture packages people are demanding.
(3) Option 3 is the best one for the future of the Thrashers. In this case, Waddell struggles to re-sign Kovalchuk. The team is tanking, and Ilya needs a show of faith from management. The owners, therefore, decide to finally step in and remove Waddell from his position. Kovalchuk re-signs with a new GM in place.
Personally, I can't stand watching Kovalchuk's amazing talent go to waste under such mismanagement. There's nothing more annoying than a GM who doesn't know what's he doing. If I was a Thrashers fan, I wouldn't want to hear the excuses. Zhitnik for Coburn? Letting go of Savard and sigining Holik? Hiring Bob Hartley, who was totally wrong for the team? Just get him out of there before it's too late! Atlanta has a future if they get rid of this guy.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MonacoBlue