Sens sign Kovalev!!

It's such a small risk though Flo, it's 1.6 vs 5 million. If it doesn't work, you put him on waivers again, but for a guy like Recchi, there was never any red flags, unlike an old, tired Kovalev who already had a history of playing when he wanted to. It was a bad signing by someone who should have probably known better, but to the rest of us, it was an excellent lesson in what not to do.

People are also forgetting what the circumstances around the signing were and fact of the matter is the Sens don't make the playoffs without Kovalev in 2009.

NEELY wrote:People are also forgetting what the circumstances around the signing were and fact of the matter is the Sens don't make the playoffs without Kovalev in 2009.

Depends...who would we have put on that line if he hadn't signed?

Cheechoo

SpezDispenser wrote:It's such a small risk though Flo, it's 1.6 vs 5 million. If it doesn't work, you put him on waivers again, but for a guy like Recchi, there was never any red flags, unlike an old, tired Kovalev who already had a history of playing when he wanted to. It was a bad signing by someone who should have probably known better, but to the rest of us, it was an excellent lesson in what not to do.

Yeah Melnyk should have known better.

NEELY wrote:Cheechoo

Okay, then we miss the playoffs, but we know that wouldn't have been the case.

Oh yah? Who plays there then?

NEELY wrote:
Oh yah? Who plays there then?

No idea...we would have had to sign one of the 'lesser' UFAs (ha ha) or make another trade.

A quick search shows Prospal was signed on Aug.17th for 1.1 million, so ~4 less than Kovalev. He went on to score 20 goals and register 58 points.

So there's one guy who presumably would have come (back) to Ottawa.

So you are assuming the Sens sign Prospal vs a guy that carried Ottawa for 2 weeks and was the difference between the playoffs and finishing 10th?

Kovalev had an awful 2nd season with the Sens but his first was decent for sure.

That was literally the first name that came up after searching when we signed Kovalev. I agree, he had a decent year, but not irreplaceable.

Anyway, it's revisionist history at this point.

So... Sens and Russians don't mix too well... and we want Yakupov?

Diddle yeah, I'll take my chances!

Plus, we'd be in control of the guy for 7 years minimum, more if we send him back to juniors, so one way or another he would either play for us, or we'd be WELL compensated.

shabbs wrote:So... Sens and Russians don't mix too well... and we want Yakupov?

He's actually an ethnic Tatar; so maybe half Russian. I read somewhere that Zibanejad's mother is half Russian, too, but I can't find that now.

wprager wrote:The other lesson is 35+ players need to be given 1 year guaranteed plus 1-2 years as a team option. I imagine Kovalev would have played with a little more urgency if that $5M in the second year was based on how he played in the first year. Same for Gonchar and his $5.5M.

No such thing as option years under the current CBA.

ddt wrote:

wprager wrote:The other lesson is 35+ players need to be given 1 year guaranteed plus 1-2 years as a team option. I imagine Kovalev would have played with a little more urgency if that $5M in the second year was based on how he played in the first year. Same for Gonchar and his $5.5M.

No such thing as option years under the current CBA.

Ah, interesting. Another point up for discussion, then. It kinda falls under the guaranteed contracts that the players simply will not want to give up, but I just don't see a better way to make everyone happy-ish.

The first 5 pages of this thread are an outstanding re-read with lots of Kool-Aid being consumed.

dennycrane wrote:The first 5 pages of this thread are an outstanding re-read with lots of Kool-Aid being consumed.

Heh heh.

I stand by my reaction when I heard the news the day we signed him:

"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"