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

2012 CBA/Lockout talk, It's not looking good VI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2012, 02:08 PM
  #651
JMiller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watertown
Posts: 17,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EverettMike View Post
I will defend the Jacobs/O'Connell plan for dealing with the first lockout forever.

Forever.

It was a great plan that was ruined by a scenario no one, not even the most hardass owner (Jacobs himself) could have predicted. If you thought the league was getting a hard cap that low and the 24% rollback you should be czar.

This time though he screwed up the other way (potentially) and would be as responsible as anyone.

"Yeah, Peter, lock these guys up. I am going to fight tooth and nail for the next CBA to **** us over though."

uuuungh. I have to imagine the big market owners that don't like this battle will have some say in this. Why would so many teams that have huge financial advantages so willingly allow themselves to be hurt by this so badly?
You never want to be an outlier when heading into negotiations about collective barganing. The herd will negotiate deals that serve the herd, not the one franchize that thinks it's wikkid smaht.

JMiller is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:17 PM
  #652
DoubleAAAA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salem13 View Post
LOL, 16 players signed next year @ 57 million, none of them play goal.
Assuming there is some sort of LTIR option, $53M without Savard. Could probably shave off a Pevs or Kelly to save $3M more or downgrade Paille/Campbell and save some $.

Aren't these "make whole" payments outside of the system $ though? I thought it was in essence a roll-back, but the teams pay into a fund sort of like a reverse escrow to top up the players closer to their original contract values.

Edit:

So essentially that $57M is rolled back to say $51.3 (assuming a 10% decrease in contracts to bring teams to 50/50) and then the players receive $X outside the cap to "make whole".


Last edited by DoubleAAAA: 12-11-2012 at 02:25 PM.
DoubleAAAA is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:22 PM
  #653
Salem13
Registered User
 
Salem13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Salem,Mass
Country: United States
Posts: 3,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleAAAA View Post
Assuming there is some sort of LTIR option, $53M without Savard. Could probably shave off a Pevs or Kelly to save $3M more or downgrade Paille/Campbell and save some $.

Aren't these "make whole" payments outside of the system $ though? I thought it was in essence a roll-back, but the teams pay into a fund sort of like a reverse escrow to top up the players closer to their original contract values.
Yea, there is an adjustment of the total but otherwise provided to "make whole" the existing contracts but...


...that all just smells so bad I try not to include it in thought and here it has to be.



It's not nearly that bad but it feels like it... probably because we secret expect to be screwed as Bruins fans.

Salem13 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:39 PM
  #654
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Game time, baby
Country: United States
Posts: 39,492
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
Quote:
Originally Posted by EverettMike View Post
I will defend the Jacobs/O'Connell plan for dealing with the first lockout forever.

Forever.

It was a great plan that was ruined by a scenario no one, not even the most hardass owner (Jacobs himself) could have predicted. If you thought the league was getting a hard cap that low and the 24% rollback you should be czar.

This time though he screwed up the other way (potentially) and would be as responsible as anyone.

"Yeah, Peter, lock these guys up. I am going to fight tooth and nail for the next CBA to **** us over though."

uuuungh. I have to imagine the big market owners that don't like this battle will have some say in this. Why would so many teams that have huge financial advantages so willingly allow themselves to be hurt by this so badly?
It's makes you wonder if these guys even talk, doesn't it? It's like, "I'm going to be the guy pushing for a new set of rules, but I'm not going to tell you so you can flop around like a fish out of water when they take effect.".. Idiotic on Jacobs part. Just stupid. One would figure these guidelines were talked about in the ownership group before July 1st, no?

WBC8 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:42 PM
  #655
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhamBamCam8 View Post
It's makes you wonder if these guys even talk, doesn't it? It's like, "I'm going to be the guy pushing for a new set of rules, but I'm not going to tell you so you can flop around like a fish out of water when they take effect.".. Idiotic on Jacobs part. Just stupid. One would figure these guidelines were talked about in the ownership group before July 1st, no?
Chiarelli did say he was going to sign his guys and make adjustments need be later. I'm sure he was under the impression that the cap would go down as he was constantly saying such. The Bruins have a lot of money tied up on that 4th line, and 3rd to an extent, I would bet he looks to free up cash there?

patty59 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 02:52 PM
  #656
DoubleAAAA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patty59 View Post
Chiarelli did say he was going to sign his guys and make adjustments need be later. I'm sure he was under the impression that the cap would go down as he was constantly saying such. The Bruins have a lot of money tied up on that 4th line, and 3rd to an extent, I would bet he looks to free up cash there?
I think the reason owners are pushing for "no amnesty buyouts" is because all teams are currently in compliance with the previous cap and this is merely an adjustment to that cap and related contracts. So every team will be, in essence, in the same position (relatively) as they were in the previous system.

ie the Bruins current $68M cap hit in the $70.2M Cap system would be $68 x 50/57 = $60M in the new cap system.

Or at least that's how I'm understanding it. Maybe I'm wrong on that.

Club's needed the amnesty buyouts before because there was no salary cap.

DoubleAAAA is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:01 PM
  #657
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Better to have them locked up then not at this point. Signed players are tradeable assets. You might have to move out a Boychuk or Ference and replace them with a kid. Perhaps shave some of that money off your third and 4th lines. Maybe even trade a guy like Krejci and have Seguin take over the top center role, but you at least get assets back for those players.

If the cap falls without a rollback you'd have to think we'd see a few young guys win over roster spots. Caron, Spooner, Knight, Hamilton... maybe even coax the yeti over from the SEL Boston is deep at least, some of the other teams that would be in trouble would struggle to fill out a roster.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleAAAA View Post
I think the reason owners are pushing for "no amnesty buyouts" is because all teams are currently in compliance with the previous cap and this is merely an adjustment to that cap and related contracts. So every team will be, in essence, in the same position (relatively) as they were in the previous system.

ie the Bruins current $68M cap hit in the $70.2M Cap system would be $68 x 50/57 = $60M in the new cap system. eve it

Or at least that's how I'm understanding it. Maybe I'm wrong on that.

Club's needed the amnesty buyouts before because there was no salary cap.
Personally I believe it's because it severely favors the richer teams. Everything the owners are doing is about making it easier for the lower revenue teams to turn a profit, and also maintaining parity throughout the league. Throw an amnesty buyout into the mix and there's little chance any but the teams making money teams would take advantage of it.


Last edited by Kaoz*: 12-11-2012 at 04:12 PM.
Kaoz* is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 04:14 PM
  #658
neelynugs
Registered User
 
neelynugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Vote Quimby!
Posts: 30,021
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
If the cap falls without a rollback you'd have to think we'd see a few young guys win over roster spots. Caron, Spooner, Knight, Hamilton... maybe even coax the yeti over from the SEL Boston is deep at least, some of the other teams that would be in trouble would struggle to fill out a roster.


.
don't forget macdermid - he can easily play a 4th line/extra forward role for cheap. also gotta figure bourque will end up on the team. he started off slow in providence but is another cheap guy with some potential upside.

neelynugs is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:02 PM
  #659
GordonHowe
Registered User
 
GordonHowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dorchester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtbruins View Post
I think this is a fantastic idea. Let's do anything we possibly can.
Sign the Facebook petition and sally forth,


GordonHowe is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:14 PM
  #660
Colt.45Orr
Registered User
 
Colt.45Orr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,324
vCash: 500
Folks, they are really, really close right now. This thing *could* be done soon *however* as I tried warning 50% of you a few months ago: you cannot allow yourself to get too high or too low until it is either officially signed, or officially cancelled.

It is too easy to get sucked in to getting too optimistic --as most did during the Fehr spin-cycle last week and it is too easy to get down on the process as most did after Bettman's exhibition shortly after.

Hopefully the B's board can lead the way.

Colt.45Orr is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:14 PM
  #661
MarshmontMcSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EverettMike View Post
I will defend the Jacobs/O'Connell plan for dealing with the first lockout forever.

Forever.

It was a great plan that was ruined by a scenario no one, not even the most hardass owner (Jacobs himself) could have predicted. If you thought the league was getting a hard cap that low and the 24% rollback you should be czar.

This time though he screwed up the other way (potentially) and would be as responsible as anyone.

"Yeah, Peter, lock these guys up. I am going to fight tooth and nail for the next CBA to **** us over though."

uuuungh. I have to imagine the big market owners that don't like this battle will have some say in this. Why would so many teams that have huge financial advantages so willingly allow themselves to be hurt by this so badly?
I think you're going too far here.

That strategy cost the Bruins some serious talent. And I am going to indulge you and assume we got Modano instead of Zhamnov and still ask if you think the plan would have been smart and worth it since we basically told Knuble, Nylander, Gonchar, and Rolston to screw.

(Gonchar, Nylander, Rolston were in their primes and Knuble who happened to be the best NHLer in Europe during the lockout those are 4 pretty damn legit players and basically thats like us losing Marchand, Bergeron, and Seidenberg this lockout.)


Now losing those lesser players (Green, McCarthy, Jillson, Slegr etc) is fine and replacing them was going to be easy enough. But Gonchar, Nylander, Rolston, and Knuble were definitely near elite talent that wasn't going to be easy to replace. Nor was it a safe bet to expect to sign them after the lockout when they come crawling back to MOC with their tail between their legs instead of taking the highest offer from the 30 NHL teams.


Basically that plan cost us 4 building blocks in their prime (Nylander, Rolston, Knuble collectively will make sure your second and third lines don't suck since none were gonna play on the first line and all were really good NHLers back then).

But really best case scenario of the Sinden/MOC plan is that we get to add a Modano to Murray/Thornton/Sammy and hopefully not lose both Nylander and Gonchar and keep one of Knuble/Rolston. Absolute best case scenario.

So do you think getting Modano would have been what we needed to get over the top and win a Cup? I wanted Mike after the lockout badly but in hindsight I dunno if he'd have been a difference maker.

I loved the 4 players we let walk Gonchar, Knuble, Rolly, and Nylander were ****ing awesome.

MarshmontMcSlewfoot is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:44 PM
  #662
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neelynugs View Post
don't forget macdermid - he can easily play a 4th line/extra forward role for cheap. also gotta figure bourque will end up on the team. he started off slow in providence but is another cheap guy with some potential upside.
Crap, I just went with the sexy picks and completely ignored the realistic ones. You'd have to think McDermid and Bourque would be favorites for those spots allowing the others to develop. Bartkowski and Warsofsky on the backend.

Bruins are pretty well protected in this case, those are all guys you could realistically slot in now if needed. Much rather the scenario where they have players to move then the one where they have spots to fill with scarce NHL talent
.

Kaoz* is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:54 PM
  #663
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 32,389
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt.45Orr View Post
Folks, they are really, really close right now. This thing *could* be done soon *however* as I tried warning 50% of you a few months ago: you cannot allow yourself to get too high or too low until it is either officially signed, or officially cancelled.

It is too easy to get sucked in to getting too optimistic --as most did during the Fehr spin-cycle last week and it is too easy to get down on the process as most did after Bettman's exhibition shortly after.

Hopefully the B's board can lead the way.
I think both sides are pretty well cooked- I can't believe they have any more punches left; maybe a push and jab but it certainly looks like the end of this fight is coming to a conclusion

For those who do not like Jeremy Jacobs or Gary Bettman, be warmed knowing every time they think of Don Fehr they will need something to tame the stomach acid

DKH is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 05:58 PM
  #664
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 32,389
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therick67 View Post
Maybe the third lockout will be the charm.
if he is still with us he would be 83....you think he'd be up for it

DKH is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:06 PM
  #665
JMiller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watertown
Posts: 17,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKH View Post
if he is still with us he would be 83....you think he'd be up for it
Vampires live forever.

JMiller is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:36 PM
  #666
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Better to have them locked up then not at this point. Signed players are tradeable assets.
Bingo. Correct.

There's also the provision rumored which would allow teams to trade cap space. The team could be fixed in a transaction or two.

The key to this, is that Chiarelli didn't sign anyone to outrageous deals. Every contract on this team (save Savard and Thomas) is an asset that could be cashed in. The more assets you have, the better of a position you are going to be in... Regardless of whether or not you are over budget.

Mr. Make-Believe is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:25 PM
  #667
GordonHowe
Registered User
 
GordonHowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dorchester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMiller View Post
Vampires live forever.
Yes. Yes they do.

On Wall St., K Street, & Causeway.

Bet on it.

"Selling short" indeed.

GordonHowe is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:25 PM
  #668
neelynugs
Registered User
 
neelynugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Vote Quimby!
Posts: 30,021
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Crap, I just went with the sexy picks and completely ignored the realistic ones. You'd have to think McDermid and Bourque would be favorites for those spots allowing the others to develop. Bartkowski and Warsofsky on the backend.

Bruins are pretty well protected in this case, those are all guys you could realistically slot in now if needed. Much rather the scenario where they have players to move then the one where they have spots to fill with scarce NHL talent
.
i'd be a lot more concerned with their blueline - that's why moving a boychuk or ference is pretty unlikely in this scenario of dumping dollars. not only are they pretty thin back there, but there's no young guys all that close to a regular job (hamilton aside, and we don't even know how close he is - mainly guessing that he can keep up based on his pedigree).

guys like paille, campbell, kelly, pevs - much more likely to look there first...plus horton and thomas gone in 2013-14/savvy to LTIR whenever.

neelynugs is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:59 PM
  #669
northeastern
Registered User
 
northeastern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: boston
Country: United States
Posts: 5,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMiller View Post
Vampires live forever.
this made me laugh, out loud.



I'm going to do my best to try to avoid reading and looking for updates all day tomorrow... it is so frustrating

northeastern is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 08:26 PM
  #670
Dellstrom
Pastrnasty
 
Dellstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 20,427
vCash: 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Crap, I just went with the sexy picks and completely ignored the realistic ones. You'd have to think McDermid and Bourque would be favorites for those spots allowing the others to develop. Bartkowski and Warsofsky on the backend.

Bruins are pretty well protected in this case, those are all guys you could realistically slot in now if needed. Much rather the scenario where they have players to move then the one where they have spots to fill with scarce NHL talent
.


Even if he's nothing past a 4th liner, he's here to stay. A young guy going after an experienced veteran who's no slouch? He gained quite a bit of respect there.

Dellstrom is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 12:02 AM
  #671
Neely08
Registered User
 
Neely08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: North of Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 18,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt.45Orr View Post
Folks, they are really, really close right now. This thing *could* be done soon *however* as I tried warning 50% of you a few months ago: you cannot allow yourself to get too high or too low until it is either officially signed, or officially cancelled.

It is too easy to get sucked in to getting too optimistic --as most did during the Fehr spin-cycle last week and it is too easy to get down on the process as most did after Bettman's exhibition shortly after.

Hopefully the B's board can lead the way.
This is what happened to me last week, then..... NO! I really thought they were going to seal the deal.

I can't believe I sat through an entire replay of penguins vs habs playoff game from 2010. That's like watching hezbollah play al-qaeda in soccer, or maybe goat throwing or something. I've suffered enough.

Neely08 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 01:08 AM
  #672
Colt.45Orr
Registered User
 
Colt.45Orr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely08 View Post
This is what happened to me last week, then..... NO! I really thought they were going to seal the deal.

I can't believe I sat through an entire replay of penguins vs habs playoff game from 2010. That's like watching hezbollah play al-qaeda in soccer, or maybe goat throwing or something. I've suffered enough.
Gross.

Colt.45Orr is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:51 AM
  #673
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 32,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharaTriedToEatMe View Post
I think you're going too far here.

That strategy cost the Bruins some serious talent. And I am going to indulge you and assume we got Modano instead of Zhamnov and still ask if you think the plan would have been smart and worth it since we basically told Knuble, Nylander, Gonchar, and Rolston to screw.

(Gonchar, Nylander, Rolston were in their primes and Knuble who happened to be the best NHLer in Europe during the lockout those are 4 pretty damn legit players and basically thats like us losing Marchand, Bergeron, and Seidenberg this lockout.)


Now losing those lesser players (Green, McCarthy, Jillson, Slegr etc) is fine and replacing them was going to be easy enough. But Gonchar, Nylander, Rolston, and Knuble were definitely near elite talent that wasn't going to be easy to replace. Nor was it a safe bet to expect to sign them after the lockout when they come crawling back to MOC with their tail between their legs instead of taking the highest offer from the 30 NHL teams.


Basically that plan cost us 4 building blocks in their prime (Nylander, Rolston, Knuble collectively will make sure your second and third lines don't suck since none were gonna play on the first line and all were really good NHLers back then).

But really best case scenario of the Sinden/MOC plan is that we get to add a Modano to Murray/Thornton/Sammy and hopefully not lose both Nylander and Gonchar and keep one of Knuble/Rolston. Absolute best case scenario.

So do you think getting Modano would have been what we needed to get over the top and win a Cup? I wanted Mike after the lockout badly but in hindsight I dunno if he'd have been a difference maker.

I loved the 4 players we let walk Gonchar, Knuble, Rolly, and Nylander were ****ing awesome.
I see what your saying however, NOBODY has ever put Rolston/Knuble and Nylander under the category of/as "elite", they were all very good players however...

ODAAT is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 07:37 AM
  #674
BlackNgold 84
Known Kellyist
 
BlackNgold 84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Country: United States
Posts: 2,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMiller View Post
Vampires live forever.

:la ugh: That was incredible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dellstrom View Post


Even if he's nothing past a 4th liner, he's here to stay. A young guy going after an experienced veteran who's no slouch? He gained quite a bit of respect there.
Kid is ballsy.. In a couple of years i'd like to see the whole buzzsaw line on the bruins. I've been to two p-bruins games this year and i've been impressed by their play. Even Robins.

BlackNgold 84 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 07:50 AM
  #675
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neelynugs View Post
i'd be a lot more concerned with their blueline - that's why moving a boychuk or ference is pretty unlikely in this scenario of dumping dollars. not only are they pretty thin back there, but there's no young guys all that close to a regular job (hamilton aside, and we don't even know how close he is - mainly guessing that he can keep up based on his pedigree).

guys like paille, campbell, kelly, pevs - much more likely to look there first...plus horton and thomas gone in 2013-14/savvy to LTIR whenever.
Really? I thought they might have a hard time covering off Boychuks size, but figured if they had to move either he or Ference it'd be doable with some of the folks in Provo? I may not worry enough that there are not many high end choices down there though, as the guys the B's made their defense corp out of were never really those types of guys anyway. Julien just always seems to be able to get the best out of his D.

It would be nice to see them target some real potential on the blueline with the guys they might have to move out though. Maybe see if they can't steal a Wiercioch type from somewhere.

Kaoz* 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 01:54 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.