Every Monday (except this week, when news and posts bumped this to Tuesday), the FTR crew will review the biggest hockey news from the past week.

-The Kovalchuk situation fired off a frenzy of a Twitter and blog frenzy, including a post here at FTR. What sources can fans trust?
Mike: In this day and age, it seems like new flies from Twitter to blog to mainstream site almost instantly. That leaves a lot of people claiming to have "sources" when they're really just repeating what else they find. We caused a bit of a stir with our Kovalchuk-to-LA post, but the source was trusted among SBN, so we decided to run it, even though you won't find too many rumors on SBN. In general, the Twitter accounts of the TSN folks and USA Today's Kevin Allen are probably the most reliable sources. If there's a site or a board you visit with a juicy rumor and you trust the source, the rumor may be valid -- but keep in mind that GMs talk to each other all the time, and there are plenty of deals that fall apart at the last minute due to a hangup or two. Chatroom fodder and rumor websites will get you educated guesses and speculation. For me, I always read Lyle "Spector" Richardson every day, as he rounds up rumors with cited sources.

FrankD: It's fun to follow breaking stories and rumors on Twitter.  Some are a bit ridiculous, while others more likely.  I think educated hockey fans know how to differentiate between something that is far fetched and something that is a possible, but at the same time speculation and hypothetical posts of "Player X may go to Team Y" make for some fun, interesting and at times even very intense discussions.  Why not give people a place to discuss the possibilities?  Why not give fans a chance to breakdown the potential players or picks that may be involved in the moves?  I don't expect people to be right 100% of the time and I don't hold it against anyone for being wrong either.  "Wrong," in and of itself, is a loose term anyway because you can never really say how close a speculated rumor came to being completed before another team swept in from out of nowhere and changed the playing field.  Even afterward, if a team admits they weren't in on the trade rumors, do you really think they'd want the locker room to think a few heads were on the chopping block?  I highly doubt it.  So they'll go ahead and say, "We were never interested."   I think too many people bank far too much on who said what, when, where and why.  An educated fan who trusts his analysts, sites or blogs will know when to open up a rumor or dismiss it as garbage.

Bob:  What sources can fans trust?  None, unless the deal is announced as being completed.  The simple fact of the matter is that until a deal is 100% completed, things can happen to alter it.  General managers change their minds.  A new party can become involved.  Sometimes a source will intentionally use the media to publish information that is not be true.  Even the mainstream media can not be sure about a trade rumor until the trade is officially approved by the league's head office.   So trust no one.  (Am I being too cynical?)

Cory Lavalette: It seems that you can't be sure of anything until a guy is in a new sweater. Between physicals, cap clearance by the league and other factors, trades aren't done until they are truly done. I don't know that there's harm in reporting what you hear if you feel it's legitimate. We learned a lesson about how reporting "close" can be turned to "imminent" and then "done deal" in a game of Internet telephone. Even Darren Dreger's report of the Nic Wallin trade being "close" last week almost didn't come true.
 
Joe F: At the end of the day you almost can't trust anyone. If you look at the days before the Kovalchuk deal you would see that everyone was reporting something different, because everyone was hearting something different. That's not to say that some sites don't have actual trustworthy sources but it does mean that trades in the NHL have a life of their own and can change on a dime.

-The NHL (and NBC) scheduled Pens/Caps on the morning of the Super Bowl. Smart or stupid programming? (Discussed prior to the release of the 1.3 overnight rating)
Mike: Um, I know plenty of hockey fans and most of them have some sort of non-TV watching plans on Super Bowl morning. It's an interesting ploy, though, and I suppose it explores a new method. Sports fans will certainly have their TVs on during the day, and I've never met a single person who actually likes the umpteen hours of Super Bowl pre-game. Still, you have to remember that people are out buying beer or BBQ or running errands for Super Bowl parties during this time, so it's an interesting experiment.

FrankD: I really didn't plan on sitting in front of the TV for a combined 7 hours on Sunday but I guess I don't have much of a choice at this point.  I want to watch that matchup and I also want to watch the Super Bowl, so I guess I'll try and run some errands or do some chores during intermission or between games.  But again, that's coming from the perspective of a hockey fan.  I think if the NHL planned this game with the hopes of pulling in a few new fans then it's going to fall short.  Too many people will be focused on six hours of pregame Super Bowl coverage or shopping last minute at stores for food and drinks to consider sitting in front of the TV to watch a game they know little about.

Bob:  I don't know about this.  I'll be watching the game, but will most sports fans have the television on?  It's worth a try I guess, we'll see what the ratings are afterward.

Cory Lavalette: It can't hurt, in my opinion. The people who are dying to watch it will watch anyway, and perhaps you'll draw more people in that don't want 10 hours of Super Bowl pregame analysis.
 
Joe F: I don't mind it too much. There is so much prep for the Super Bowl that they might have the ability to nab a few viewers who don't want to see the game looked over for the ump-teenth time. Some hockey thrown in might h a few eyes.

-Rosters are frozen during the Olympic Break. Does that act as the de facto trade deadline or will teams wait to see the injury situation following the Olympics?

Mike: I think it's a game of chicken. Teams may want to wait until after the Olympics (there was word that one team in the Kovalchuk sweepstakes was concerned about this), but GMs tend to be reactive to each other. It becomes an arms race of one-upping each other, and I think that's why you'll see a few more moves before the Olympics, and that will make the actual trade deadline a little less exciting. I'd think that the smart thing to do would be to wait past the Olympics for injury concerns, but we all know that GMs aren't exactly the most patient folks out there.

FrankD: I think we've seen by now that teams are kinda handling that point as a trade deadline of sorts.  There's been a lot of moves from team to team and I don't think it'll let off entirely before the break.  If I were running a front office though I'd likely wait till after the Olympic break, just to be sure everyone is healthy and ready to go rather than walk away the loser in a trade.

Bob:  Hurricanes general manager Jim Rutherford has gone on record as saying that he would prefer to trade sooner, rather than later.  But even though he said that, sometimes a GM will need to wait until the very last minute to make sure they are maximizing the value of their asset.  That's why you always see a lot of activity on the very last day.  I don't think this year will be any different, some GM's will wait until they are positive that they are getting the most they can and you will see the typical trade deadline day frenzy this season. 

Cory Lavalette: Just because there is a freeze doesn't mean team can't talk. I think the GMs from around the league will have a lot of time on their hands during the shutdown and a lot of trades will be negotiated during that time — they just won't be finalized until after the Olympic break.
 
Joe F: On a personal note I feel as though the Olympics will allow general managers to talk out some deals, maybe work them out in their heads and then have an opportunity to wait and see (if the players they are trading for are in the Olympics). Although it should be noted that most of the top-flight players preforming in the Olympics probably wont be swapping sides, but we will see thats what makes the trade deadline fun.

-Will Olli Jokinen regain his form or will he be an overpaid second-line center for the rest of his career?

Mike: I don't know if he'll regain his form, but I'd say this is his last chance for a big payday. If he can finish the season strong and contribute during the postseason, he may get another $5 - $6 million contract (which will lead to further disappointment). Otherwise, I can't imagine he'll get more than $4 million in the off-season. Still, GMs have done dumber things (Wade Redden), and it really is up to Jokinen at this point. He'll be given every chance to succeed by playing with Marian Gaborik and Vaclav Prospal on the Rangers' top line, and he'll see significant power play time.Let's see if money can motivate him more than Brent Sutter or Wayne Gretzky could have.

FrankD: It seems like he has to prove himself again.  The guy's worn three jerseys in the span of 1 1/2 seasons, so respect isn't going to come easy right now.  Not to mention he had little impact overall on any of the first two teams, with the Rangers still pending.  Of all three, the Rangers offer up the best chance for him to regain that confidence.  They'd love to see him tally some more goals.  I mean, outside of Marian Gaborik they don't have much a threat on offense.  There's no denying that he's trending downward since his days in Florida.  If Jokinen can somehow bring a little more depth and threat to an otherwise lackluster offense, I think his stock, reputation and confidence goes up significantly.

Bob:  This is a player fans love to hate, seemingly because of his attitude.  But not only do fans dislike him, he seems to rub some of his teammates the wrong way as well.  Until he develops a little humility and tries to be the ultimate team player, he will continue to be an "overpaid second-line center". It's hard to see him turning anything around in NY.

Cory Lavalette: Jokinen will likely go down as a player who does well on bad teams. He can be your team's best player, just not if you want to be a contender. The problem is he doesn't seem to fit into a complementary role well. In his defense, he was miscast in Calgary — they didn't need a scorer to center Jarome Iginla, they needed a setup man — and may be a better fit in New York. There's no denying his physical tools, but he needs to find a way to mesh with teammates instead of, for whatever reason, repelling them.
 
Joe F: The misunderstanding with the Jokinen deal was that it was not meant to save the Rangers season. What the Jokinen deal really did was clear 3 million dollars worth of cap space for the end of the year. With Jokinen chip in a few goals and help the Rangers scoring problems? Probably a little. Will his contributions alone help the Rangers regain the form they have been lacking since the first 8 games of the season? No. And if you look around the league (in Florida and Phoenix) you hear a ton of good things about Jokinen, it was only Calgary where he had problems, which is a problem within itself because the Calgary market if bigger than the Florida and Phoenix market combined.

-Tampa Bay's finally under new ownership. Can it be any worse than the Koules/Barrie era?

Mike: No, it can't get any worse. Those guys were short-sighted, undisciplined, unstructured, and tampering. Remember early on when they said that they were basically acting as GMs? There has to be a chain of command, and one of the best things that new owner Jeff Vinik has already said is that he will be an owner in that he will provide resources and hire professionals to do their jobs. If Vinik presents a budget and lets Brian Lawton do his thing, then he's already taken a major step forward to undoing all of the damage that Koules/Barrie did.

FrankD: I have no idea how things are going to pan out in TB, for good or bad, but at least we can agree that if this brings an end to the series of Saw movies then we all walk away winners.  (Unfortunately Saw VII is in pre-production as I type though sigh).

Bob:  Never say it can't get any worse..  :-)  But seriously, it's hard to imagine that things could get worse in Tampa, unless new ownership wants to trade Vinny Lecavalier for spare parts like some rumors suggest.  (Trust no one, see above).    If it was me, I would get rid of Lawton as well and hire a new GM.

Joe F: I don't think it can get any worse, but again, you really never know. The biggest issues to start with will be the budget and from there it will be who allows who to run on-ice operations. For now though everything seems calm on the surface.

Cory Lavalette: Nope, it can't get worse, therefore this is good for the franchise. It's one thing to have multiple owners, but it's another to have two who think they know what's best when it comes to the on-ice operations. Hopefully Vinik steps in and lets Brian Lawton or his replacement worry about the hockey operations and he worries about how he's going to make money and rebuild a fan base that was once thriving.