HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Per Dreger: Looks like the Rangers - All Nash Talk

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-21-2012, 11:36 AM
  #76
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
...

This Bruins team is DAMN GOOD. Not mediocre. DAMN GOOD.

My issue, is with the cap space they could use and with the personnel they currently have - it wouldn't take much for them to become the best team in the NHL. It's a position that's up for grabs and it wouldn't take much to do so.

My concern, is that Chiarelli WON'T make that move.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 11:45 AM
  #77
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainOfJ View Post
It was pretty consistent though. they went on a two month rampage and the rest was consistent .500 hockey. They finished tied for 4th the east because of that run they went on(and being 19-4-1 against the awful conference we are in haha) and if you look at the teams we beat on November and December...they're pretty subpar.

all I'm saying is yes, this team won with a goalie breaking every record out there who is gone now...and a forward group that has changed. If you just "maintain the course", that won't fly...and we saw that this year when the goalie came down to earth and injuries hit. teams are improving around us, ahead of us, and behind us. If we get caught watching the 2011 cup dvd and calling the 2013 team cup champions because they share some players...we'll get no where.

does that mean get Rick Nash? no. but in no way did last season make me confident about maintaining the course going into this season. This isn't a team coming off a cup championship, its a team coming off a first round exit to a lower seeded team.
I hate reading fans 'de-value' the 11' Cup win beacuse "Thomas went on a magical run yada yada".. Hello EVERY team that wins the Cup goes on a magical run and has luck of sorts (Jonathan Quick 2012 Cup & Conn Smythe winner says hello).

This Bruins team will come back rested, hungry, and hopefully w/ a few minor additions will be ready to contend again. And with any luck, can stay relatively healthy & make another long run at the Cup.

Oates2Neely is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 11:48 AM
  #78
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
I hate reading fans 'de-value' the 11' Cup win beacuse "Thomas went on a magical run yada yada".. Hello EVERY team that wins the Cup goes on a magical run and has luck of sorts (Jonathan Quick 2012 Cup & Conn Smythe winner says hello).

This Bruins team will come back rested, hungry, and hopefully w/ a few minor additions will be ready to contend again. And with any luck, can stay relatively healthy & make another long run at the Cup.
I don't think it's devaluing. It's something to point out and say "hey... Tim Thomas was the single most important piece of our Cup run and he's no longer here"

There's genuine reason to be troubled by that.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 11:59 AM
  #79
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
I don't think it's devaluing. It's something to point out and say "hey... Tim Thomas was the single most important piece of our Cup run and he's no longer here"

There's genuine reason to be troubled by that.
THAT Tim Thomas wasn't here in 2012 playoffs,, it's likely he would never elevate his game to that level again even if he were still w/ the Bruins. My point is every Cup winning team has a player that goes on an insane tear,, for the 2011 Bruins it just happened to be Tim Thomas. For the Kings it was Quick, for all we know 2013 it could be Seguin who plays out of his mind.

Oates2Neely is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 12:09 PM
  #80
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
THAT Tim Thomas wasn't here in 2012 playoffs,, it's likely he would never elevate his game to that level again even if he were still w/ the Bruins. My point is every Cup winning team has a player that goes on an insane tear,, for the 2011 Bruins it just happened to be Tim Thomas. For the Kings it was Quick, for all we know 2013 it could be Seguin who plays out of his mind.
No, he was still on the team. That was still Tim Thomas in net. I don't have a picture right now, but I swear I can prove it to ya.

Quick didn't win the Kings their Championship. They went through every team they faced, without any genuine adversity.

Thomas didn't win us our Cup. There were times when he was off his game and EVERYONE contributed at different times to pull it off. But man oh man, was there adversity. And at the end of the day, Tim Thomas ended up being our most important player. There was a fine line between winning and losing... Without Tim Thomas, there was no celebration.

He's gone now and the team hasn't improved in any other area (while other teams HAVE gotten better, as per protocol). Good team we have or not, that's no red herring. That's a very legitimate concern.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 12:15 PM
  #81
Shaun
beauty
 
Shaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Italy
Posts: 21,222
vCash: 50
Darren Dreger ‏@DarrenDreger
Nash's agent, Joe Resnick will meet with CBJ gm Scott Howson this afternoon. Have to think he encourages a trade.

Shaun is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 12:33 PM
  #82
24giovanni
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,373
vCash: 500
Guys, Mark my words. No one on this team will be making more than Chara so don't expect any big time trade or big FA to land here. Minor moves tops.

24giovanni is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 12:34 PM
  #83
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
...

This Bruins team is DAMN GOOD. Not mediocre. DAMN GOOD.

My issue, is with the cap space they could use and with the personnel they currently have - it wouldn't take much for them to become the best team in the NHL. It's a position that's up for grabs and it wouldn't take much to do so.

My concern, is that Chiarelli WON'T make that move.
If Chiarelli has an opportunity to improve the team but chooses to sit on his hands, I'd be inclined to blame it on Jacobs' meddling. After all, JJ's the point man on the owners' efforts to roll back the salary cap.


Last edited by misterjaggers: 06-21-2012 at 12:40 PM.
misterjaggers is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 12:39 PM
  #84
CanadianBruinsFan
Registered User
 
CanadianBruinsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers View Post
If Chiarelli sits on his hands, you can blame it on Jacobs. Chiarelli gets his marching orders on the salary cap from Jeremy Jacobs.
Not buying that. If Chiarelli sits on his hands, it'll be because a player didn't want to come here or a trade couldn't be done. At this point, Jacobs isn't afraid to spend cash.

CanadianBruinsFan is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 12:48 PM
  #85
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianBruinsFan View Post
Not buying that. If Chiarelli sits on his hands, it'll be because a player didn't want to come here or a trade couldn't be done. At this point, Jacobs isn't afraid to spend cash.
The salary cap is Jacob's baby. He led the charge back in 2004. Now he's leading the charge to roll back salaries. That's his priority. And judging from what Chiarelli's said, he's been told to restrain spending.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 01:19 PM
  #86
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 27,225
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycbruins View Post
Unbelievable. Remind me not to go into any more Nash threads after this. The "grass is greener" syndrome around here is absurd. So Nash is highly coveted. A great player. He also has a full NTC and a $7.8 million cap hit for 6 more years. Honestly, I wouldn't give Looch straight up. And I wish there was a way to stop some posters from enjoying the future success of certain players they just love to crap on if they have a bad game or series.

Let's turn it around. Milan Lucic is coveted by every GM in the league. He's affordable, younger with no NTC, so he can be dealt to any team the Bruins want. "Gotta give to get"....give me a fricking break. Yeah, you do have to give to get. Lucic isn't going to be a piece of a bigger deal for someone. If the Bruins decide to move Lucic, another team is going to have to pay up with some big pieces to pry him away, and we could start a whole bidding war, unlike CBJ and their 6 teams (and I still doubt Nash wants to go to Carolina.)

And this team is not mediocre in the least. Some of you probably take out all your negative cantankerous bulls**t in here so your family doesn't have to deal with it...I do the same too. But this is an excellent hockey team and I'm interested in what Chia does to tweak and improve. Need a lefty-winger shooter for the PP & 3rd line/Horton replacement (A. Kostitsyn, anyone? don't laugh too much, I might convince you)...And Chia's not going to throw his whole team and future into Rick friggin' Nash. Most overrated player on the planet right now. Man I hope my son grows to be 6'4" and can skate well. It's a free pass from criticism and people who don't watch you play think you're some terrifying stud that all bow down to. Rick Nash isn't that guy. He's not worth his cap hit alone, never mind these proposed deals.

If CBJ gets desperate after the draft and an offer of something like Krejci, Caron, Spooner & a 1st would suffice, then I'll think about it. Get Knight & Lucic out of there. And I'm still not thrilled.

But it will be funny to see everybody's head explode when Rick Nash can't walk on water, hardly ever plays a physical game, doesn't have as many moves & creativity as highlight reels suggest, and disappears for stretches of time like most players. You'll be begging for Lucic back. All for what...5 more goals/year and an extra $3-4 million? Eff that.
Nash will be gone within 2 weeks and we can move on to something else

DKH is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 01:23 PM
  #87
Donnie Shulzhoffer
Registered User
 
Donnie Shulzhoffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Foxboro, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers View Post
The salary cap is Jacob's baby. He led the charge back in 2004. Now he's leading the charge to roll back salaries. That's his priority. And judging from what Chiarelli's said, he's been told to restrain spending.
Where is your proof of that when the Bruins have spent right up to the cap every year since it began?

Donnie Shulzhoffer is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 01:36 PM
  #88
LSCII
Dark Cloud
 
LSCII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 24,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie Shulzhoffer View Post
Where is your proof of that when the Bruins have spent right up to the cap every year since it began?
That's inaccurate. They didn't spend to the cap last year. They left a lot of money on the table, including not moving Savard to LTIR. Jacobs also forced PC to stay below the cap by the amount of money owed Dave Lewis when he fired him after one year, in case you forgot.

LSCII is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 02:43 PM
  #89
VeddarRants
HEART AND SOUL
 
VeddarRants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 12,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSCII View Post

FWIW, I'm more interested in adding the skill set Nash brings more so than Nash the player. If they can get a guy like that without overpaying, whether it be Parise, Nash, Iginla, Ryan, etc...then I'm all for it.
I actually agree. We could use a top end shooter and Nash's size and skating is just icing on the cake. The trick is the cost it's going to take to get him and the cost it's going to take to keep him.

VeddarRants is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 03:06 PM
  #90
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie Shulzhoffer View Post
Where is your proof of that when the Bruins have spent right up to the cap every year since it began?
It seems like Chiarelli's talked more about the salary cap shrinking than all the other G.M.s combined. Why is he so paranoid about it?

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
06-21-2012, 05:20 PM
  #91
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers View Post
It seems like Chiarelli's talked more about the salary cap shrinking than all the other G.M.s combined. Why is he so paranoid about it?
It's an excuse. It's spin.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 05:25 PM
  #92
Gee Wally
Retired
 
Gee Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: HF retirement home
Country: United States
Posts: 33,993
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers View Post
It seems like Chiarelli's talked more about the salary cap shrinking than all the other G.M.s combined. Why is he so paranoid about it?
Because the big thing the players want is elimination of their escrow. Only way they get that is by giving owners a bigger percentage of revenue. Cap remains at current level or even possible to go down.

__________________

BOSTON STRONG !!!
Gee Wally is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 05:32 PM
  #93
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally View Post
Because the big thing the players want is elimination of their escrow. Only way they get that is by giving owners a bigger percentage of revenue. Cap remains at current level or even possible to go down.
You can't eliminate escrow. That doesn't make any sense. It NEEDS to be there in order for this system to work.

The big thing the owners want, is a bigger percentage of revenue. But the escrow will have to stay.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 05:45 PM
  #94
Gee Wally
Retired
 
Gee Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: HF retirement home
Country: United States
Posts: 33,993
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
You can't eliminate escrow. That doesn't make any sense. It NEEDS to be there in order for this system to work.

The big thing the owners want, is a bigger percentage of revenue. But the escrow will have to stay.
Ok semantics then. Minimize escrow. The players want the very least, as close to zero, they can get.

Gee Wally is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 05:52 PM
  #95
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally View Post
Ok semantics then. Minimize escrow. The players want the very least, as close to zero, they can get.
"We'd like our escrow lowered."

"Ok. But we have to lower the amount of money you make."

"We LOVE escrow! Escrow for president!"

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 05:58 PM
  #96
Gee Wally
Retired
 
Gee Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: HF retirement home
Country: United States
Posts: 33,993
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
"We'd like our escrow lowered."

"Ok. But we have to lower the amount of money you make."

"We LOVE escrow! Escrow for president!"
The second sentence is incorrect for the most part. The players for the most part, vast majority, are under contract. They, like most bargaining units, live in the here and now. Today's dollars are always worth more than tomorrow's dollars. Those under contract, majority, will go for more now. Frankly they couldn't care less about younger less senior players or future players.

So the you in your sentence is a future you, which today's players will happily sacrifice for their today's dollars.

Happens in any CBA. I've been on both sides of this table. Literally.Most fun one was Oil, chemical and atomic workers and Baxter Travenol 25 years ago. That was a pip. Old school stuff.

Gee Wally is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 06:04 PM
  #97
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally View Post
The second sentence is incorrect for the most part. The players for the most part, vast majority, are under contract. They, like most bargaining units, live in the here and now. Today's dollars are always worth more than tomorrow's dollars. Those under contract, majority, will go for more now. Frankly they couldn't care less about younger less senior players or future players.

So the you in your sentence is a future you, which today's players will happily sacrifice for their today's dollars.

Happens in any CBA. I've been on both sides of this table. Literally.Most fun one was Oil, chemical and atomic workers and Baxter Travenol 25 years ago. That was a pip. Old school stuff.
I guess I don't consider this, as it seems so... I don't know? Stupid? Counter-productive?

I could also see it happening, which is disheartening.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 06:10 PM
  #98
Gee Wally
Retired
 
Gee Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: HF retirement home
Country: United States
Posts: 33,993
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
I guess I don't consider this, as it seems so... I don't know? Stupid? Counter-productive?

I could also see it happening, which is disheartening.
Just business. What makes it easier in giving up the future players is that they are not yet your brothers in arms. They are nameless and faceless. Let them fight for theirs when it's their turn.

This is pretty much in any labor contract. It's the easiest and fastest way of reaching an agreement.
Rookie salary range is perfect example. In private industry could be less money or even benefits until seniority is gained. Even ability for promotion. It's all negotiable. What the one constant is that it will be heavily weighted to the incumbent bargaining unit members.

Gee Wally is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 06:23 PM
  #99
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally View Post
Just business. What makes it easier in giving up the future players is that they are not yet your brothers in arms. They are nameless and faceless. Let them fight for theirs when it's their turn.

This is pretty much in any labor contract. It's the easiest and fastest way of reaching an agreement.
Rookie salary range is perfect example. In private industry could be less money or even benefits until seniority is gained. Even ability for promotion. It's all negotiable. What the one constant is that it will be heavily weighted to the incumbent bargaining unit members.
It's not just future players though. It's anyone currently negotiating a contract. And it's anyone slated to negotiate their contract during the course of time that this CBA is in effect. I'd wager that's a good 75% or more of the current PA.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now  
Old
06-21-2012, 09:19 PM
  #100
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally View Post
Because the big thing the players want is elimination of their escrow. Only way they get that is by giving owners a bigger percentage of revenue. Cap remains at current level or even possible to go down.
Chiarelli and Jacobs think the Bruins will derive an advantage under the new CBA if they spend less this season than they would otherwise ?

misterjaggers is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.