Comments on: Should the Devils surrender their 2012 first-rounder to the NHL?

By: danphipps01

danphipps01 — Sun, 27 May 2012 17:47:29 +0000

Is this a rhetorical question? You give up the lowest pick. This year, they’re in the final. That means this is pretty much guaranteed to be the lowest first they’re going to get. Toss it and expect not to march to the finals each of the next two years. Done and done. Honestly, this worked out pretty favourably for the Devils, all things considered. Then again, if Malcolm Subban is still around at 29th by some freak chance, you could make a solid argument for keeping it. They do need SOME semblance of a future in net, right? Barring that… yeah, this is the year to burn it.

By: eigglesnosuperbowls

eigglesnosuperbowls — Sun, 27 May 2012 14:28:13 +0000

What is lou lammy the second coming of mario the big goof who don’t have to play by the rules like the rest of the league does ? Surrender it should be taken off them yesterday !

By: greatminnesotasportsmind

greatminnesotasportsmind — Sun, 27 May 2012 14:21:42 +0000

The NHL goofed on this one, they should have made the Devils tell them which year they are going to forfeit the pick, before the season started. Kinda easy now if you had either the last or 2nd to last pick.

By: xjokerz

xjokerz — Sun, 27 May 2012 07:48:22 +0000

You asked a question to only go on a rant about why they should … You answered your own question… The answer is yes. Oh well lose a 31st pick, you still get a 33-34pixk

By: vindicatus

vindicatus — Sun, 27 May 2012 04:40:02 +0000

Send the pick back to “Count Chocula” Bettman. Sit on it and rotate, Gary.

By: taytay099

taytay099 — Sun, 27 May 2012 03:37:28 +0000

Yes; it’s a no brainer.