HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Notices

2012 CBA/Lockout talk Part VII..Will a deal get done..

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2013, 10:52 AM
  #826
DOGSTARMAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
All I care about right now is the cap. If it drops to $60 mil the Bruins are ****ed. Trust Jacobs to undermine his own team. ::puke emoticon::
Year 1 would be $70M or whatever they are pushing for, prorated obviously.

Year 2 would be either $65M or $60M or something in between, depending on how that final battle is settled.

Year 3 would be $60M or whatever it turns out to be based on HRR and 50-50 division of HRR.

Plus there is either 1 or 2 compliance buyouts this summer.

Plus the Bruins have UFAs such as Thomas, Horton, plus LTIR for Savard left to resolve.

I don't think there's any reason to get panicky. There are tools to use, there is a transition to a lower cap, and the Bruins have some flexibility with their roster. And it's not like most other successful teams are not in the same boat nor is it likely that the crap teams of the league, and I mean that by the way they are managed not only their W-L record, are suddenly going to snatch up all the expensive castoffs the top teams can no longer afford.

And, it will not be long before some clever GMs figure out a few loopholes that give them an edge, as they always seem to.

DOGSTARMAN is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:54 AM
  #827
DOGSTARMAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morris Wanchuk View Post
I am still not sure how a 48 game schedule would work.
You will be watching games every other night. And YOU'LL LIKE IT!

DOGSTARMAN is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:55 AM
  #828
smithformeragent
Moderator
 
smithformeragent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Manchester NH
Country: United States
Posts: 8,816
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to smithformeragent
Would the buyouts look similar to those under the previous CBA? What would a buyout of someone like Kovalchuk look like, for example?

smithformeragent is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:58 AM
  #829
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 14,841
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Eye View Post
You will be watching games every other night. And YOU'LL LIKE IT!
I was reading somewhere that most NHL teams had around 40 games on the schedule in 2013.. extending the season until the end of April would make up for it.

Its just that unless they realign.. 44 games gets you the division 6 times and the conference 4

Morris Wanchuk is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:02 AM
  #830
Kalus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Quincy
Posts: 656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussellmaniaKW View Post
I don't think the cap dropping hurts the Bruins any more than other top-spending teams. The Rangers and Canucks are examples of teams that will have to make sacrifices in this case as well.

It's not like the Bruins are going to get rid of any of their top guys to become cap-compliant. They'll get rid of guys like Paille and Peverley and fast-track some of the kids. Granted you hate to see those guys go, but a lot of people around here would give anything to see prospects get a shot and other teams would have to take similar chances.
I'd say that an amnesty buyout that would accompany the cap drop would benefit a team carrying a slug of a contract (ex. Gomez, Depietro) moreso than the Bruins who have some guys that could be considered luxuries and somewhat overpaid.

Kalus is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:06 AM
  #831
Gee Wally
Retired
 
Gee Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: HF retirement home
Country: United States
Posts: 33,972
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Eye View Post
And, it will not be long before some clever GMs figure out a few loopholes that give them an edge, as they always seem to.


Yup.....this will need to be worded very carefully to stop teams from manipulating the Cap.

Like buying out and re-signing same player.

Or teams with ton of cash trading for a player , plus something they actually want, just to buy out the player on arrival.

Could be very interesting if there are loop holes.

__________________

BOSTON STRONG !!!
Gee Wally is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:07 AM
  #832
Artemis
Took the red pill
 
Artemis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Eye View Post
Year 1 would be $70M or whatever they are pushing for, prorated obviously.

Year 2 would be either $65M or $60M or something in between, depending on how that final battle is settled.

Year 3 would be $60M or whatever it turns out to be based on HRR and 50-50 division of HRR.

Plus there is either 1 or 2 compliance buyouts this summer.

Plus the Bruins have UFAs such as Thomas, Horton, plus LTIR for Savard left to resolve.

I don't think there's any reason to get panicky. There are tools to use, there is a transition to a lower cap, and the Bruins have some flexibility with their roster. And it's not like most other successful teams are not in the same boat nor is it likely that the crap teams of the league, and I mean that by the way they are managed not only their W-L record, are suddenly going to snatch up all the expensive castoffs the top teams can no longer afford.

And, it will not be long before some clever GMs figure out a few loopholes that give them an edge, as they always seem to.
$65 million next year they could live with. $60 million would be a killer. The only thing that gives me optimism is guys like Snyder, who actually like hockey and hopefully wouldn't want to hamstring their own teams. The way Jacobs is reportedly acting, he'd put every top Bruin on the block and wield the auctioneer's hammer himself.

Artemis is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:07 AM
  #833
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
 
RussellmaniaKW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalus View Post
I'd say that an amnesty buyout that would accompany the cap drop would benefit a team carrying a slug of a contract (ex. Gomez, Depietro) moreso than the Bruins who have some guys that could be considered luxuries and somewhat overpaid.
Exactly. The buyouts are best used on guys that a team couldn't possibly hope to trade for assets. The Bruins have nobody that they couldn't get a reasonable return for in a trade.

RussellmaniaKW is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:10 AM
  #834
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
 
RussellmaniaKW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,948
vCash: 500
also, can't they just put in a clause that you can't re-sign a player that you've just bought out? For some reason I thought that was already the case with the current buyout system. They already limit trading players who have been offer-sheeted, so why not this?

RussellmaniaKW is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:11 AM
  #835
Gee Wally
Retired
 
Gee Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: HF retirement home
Country: United States
Posts: 33,972
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussellmaniaKW View Post
also, can't they just put in a clause that you can't re-sign a player that you've just bought out? For some reason I thought that was already the case with the current buyout system. They already limit trading players who have been offer-sheeted, so why not this?
that should be the case. However, 'current' has no meaning. Whatever gets signed establishes everything for that duration.

Gee Wally is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:13 AM
  #836
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 27,161
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morris Wanchuk View Post
I was reading somewhere that most NHL teams had around 40 games on the schedule in 2013.. extending the season until the end of April would make up for it.

Its just that unless they realign.. 44 games gets you the division 6 times and the conference 4
in 1995 they stretched the schedule from about April 8th to May 3rd and started January 20th....about 100 days to play 48 games....say they start January 19th and play to May 5th thats about 105 days

also if they play each team in their division 7 x 4= 28 and a home and away with the other 10 you get 48 games

DKH is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:15 AM
  #837
JMiller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watertown
Posts: 13,426
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussellmaniaKW View Post
Exactly. The buyouts are best used on guys that a team couldn't possibly hope to trade for assets. The Bruins have nobody that they couldn't get a reasonable return for in a trade.
Unless the market gets flooded with guys who were bought out and could be signed for free- it would eat up a lot of the trade market. (Thinking- Luongo and Thomas)

JMiller is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:15 AM
  #838
KnightofBoston
MVP
 
KnightofBoston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Amherst, Ma
Country: United States
Posts: 12,467
vCash: 500
What I don't understand is, if the cap kept rising due to increased revenue, can't it stay relatively the same by year 3 of the new CBA if revenue continues to climb?

KnightofBoston is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:17 AM
  #839
Kaoz
Ima Krejciist.
 
Kaoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
$65 million next year they could live with. $60 million would be a killer. The only thing that gives me optimism is guys like Snyder, who actually like hockey and hopefully wouldn't want to hamstring their own teams. The way Jacobs is reportedly acting, he'd put every top Bruin on the block and wield the auctioneer's hammer himself.
Bruins are committed to 57 mill next year with 4mill from Savard in LTIR space. They need to fit in a forward, a dman, and a couple of goalies. They have Horton, Rask, and Ference to possibly re-sign and over half a season to make moves.

They can make 60 million work easily.

Kaoz is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:21 AM
  #840
smithformeragent
Moderator
 
smithformeragent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Manchester NH
Country: United States
Posts: 8,816
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to smithformeragent
a bit OT, but how has Khodobin looked this year? If they're playing every other night, they will need to lean heavily on the back up. Lacher played 35 of 48 in '95 though...

smithformeragent is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:30 AM
  #841
Cronuss
Registered User
 
Cronuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NH
Posts: 6,419
vCash: 2823
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrOverGretzky View Post
And here you have it

@HarryHabs: CBC confirming the #NHL contacted them to get ready for a Jan 19 start. Habs-Leafs at 7pm, Flames-Oilers 10pm.
So is this crap or does it hold water?

Is this guy reputable?

Cronuss is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:33 AM
  #842
Artemis
Took the red pill
 
Artemis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Bruins are committed to 57 mill next year with 4mill from Savard in LTIR space. They need to fit in a forward, a dman, and a couple of goalies. They have Horton, Rask, and Ference to possibly re-sign and over half a season to make moves.

They can make 60 million work easily.
I hope you're right. Good thing Chiarelli didn't make any ridiculous deals.

Artemis is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:36 AM
  #844
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally View Post
Yup.....this will need to be worded very carefully to stop teams from manipulating the Cap.

Like buying out and re-signing same player.

Or teams with ton of cash trading for a player , plus something they actually want, just to buy out the player on arrival.

Could be very interesting if there are loop holes.
I would hope they would have something to stop teams from buying out and then re-signing the same player.

patty59 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:38 AM
  #845
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightofBoston View Post
What I don't understand is, if the cap kept rising due to increased revenue, can't it stay relatively the same by year 3 of the new CBA if revenue continues to climb?
BINGO, KoB. Bingo.

Don't know why we couldn't have transitioned naturally in place of the ludicrous "Make Whole" provision...

All part of the process, I suppose.

Mr. Make-Believe is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:38 AM
  #846
Mione134
Registered User
 
Mione134's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hogwarts-617
Country: United States
Posts: 10,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cronuss View Post
So is this crap or does it hold water?

Is this guy reputable?
Dom wouldn't have posted it here if it was bs.

Mione134 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:38 AM
  #847
Gee Wally
Retired
 
Gee Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: HF retirement home
Country: United States
Posts: 33,972
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by patty59 View Post
I would hope they would have something to stop teams from buying out and then re-signing the same player.
I agree. My point was that if there is anyway to circumvent the cap......some GMs will surely be trying to find it. Thats part of their job.

Gee Wally is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:40 AM
  #848
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally View Post
I agree. My point was that if there is anyway to circumvent the cap......some GMs will surely be trying to find it. Thats part of their job.
Definitely, they will figure out a way to pay the players more and more. Which is part of the reason I didn't understand the players not want to get a deal done ASAP, they will ALWAYS find a way to pay more.

patty59 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:42 AM
  #849
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
BINGO, KoB. Bingo.

Don't know why we couldn't have transitioned naturally in place of the ludicrous "Make Whole" provision...

All part of the process, I suppose.
Ya, it seems to me that they are making it more complicated then they have to. Why not just set the cap to 60-65M until that hits 50% of HRR and go from there? Or keep it at 70M? I'm guessing the cap will be back to 70M in 3 years anyways.

patty59 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 11:43 AM
  #850
Kaoz
Ima Krejciist.
 
Kaoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,585
vCash: 500
Renaud Lavoie ‏@RenLavoieRDS

Don Fehr won't participate at this meeting with the league.

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 04:21 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.