Share This Page

Kovacevic: What happened to that deadline?

This Jaromir Jagr drama is beginning to veer into silly territory, and it's getting close to time for the Penguins to do something about that.

First, agent Petr Svoboda said Wednesday was going to be Decision Day. Ray Shero, the Penguins' GM, openly stated that he, too, expected a decision on his one-year offer on that same day.

Then, the agent says Jagr will deliver his decision within an hour of landing at JFK.

Then, the turtles.

Then, Jagr's whereabouts become unknown to the point that even Svoboda embarrassingly admits that he doesn't know where his client is. But still, more promises come that the decision will be today.

And now, Svoboda casually declares that a couple other teams have poked their heads into the hole and that a decision might not come today.

Enough already.

Shero and the Penguins stepped up, including Mario Lemieux, Dan Bylsma and everyone else involved in the process. Their offer, by all accounts, is fair — one year in the range of $2 million — and pretty much everything they have left under the cap while maintaining a contending team. They kept their word.

It's time for Jagr to show whether or not he's serious when he tells people "his heart is in Pittsburgh," as Svoboda reiterated again this morning.

This isn't that complicated.

Shero and the Penguins have to get about the serious business of hitting the ground running Friday at noon when the NHL's free agency season begins. And they can't afford to go one minute past 11:59 a.m. that day waiting for Jagr, Svoboda, other bidders or turtles.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.