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

Are Bruins Flexible or Foolish?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-29-2003, 01:53 PM
  #1
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 28,496
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Are Bruins Flexible or Foolish?

Just finished listening to the entire Jeff Gorton visit (nice ending wishing his nephew and my kid's classmate good luck in his mite game today); Gorton sounds much like O'Connell and touched on many things interesting but the bantor between Colagio and especially Dupont was very interesting. Gorton says the Bruins by having so few players tied up allows them the most flexibility in the league- but that sounds like a nice way of saying my dad doesn't clean toilets he's a facility maintenance man. To me its dangerous because any other flexible or nonflexible team can go after Rolston, Murray, Knuble, O'Donnell and McGillis. Is there one of us here who thinks all will be back? The Wild have low payroll and would probably love a guy like Rolston, who Don Cherry might want to go but not me. And what if a team like the Flyers or Red Wings decided they'd like a Knuble or McGillis even though there next year commitment is over $40 million NOW.

All this has to play out 2 months before any lockout. I guess we will all know where the Bruins really stand if collusion is in vogue. How is market value going to be determined? Think about that for a minute....it can't at that time.

This will be the most bizarre period in NHL history and will have many fans, players and owners pissed at other owners, the game, the league, and thats all before any lockout.

I just don't get it? How can the Broons operate with what they think will be a luxury tax? Thornton and Samsonov will be good for $13+ mil in arbitration should they choose it and they should because if they don't and hold out the Broons have them when the dust settles. Imagine Thornton passes arbitration and has no contract when the CBA goes out and a $40 mil salary cap comes in?

This is going to be unbelievable and in the end the lawyers will be rich and probably the owners moreso.

DKH is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 02:11 PM
  #2
neelynugs
Registered User
 
neelynugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Vote Quimby!
Posts: 29,637
vCash: 500
DKH- i don't think all 5 of those guys will be back...it's just not likely. however, i think they have a pecking order on them- my personal opinion is that they stack up in this order:
murray, rolston, mcgillis, knuble, o'donnell
one thing to note is that all 5 guys say they LOVE playing here. whether you believe it or not, that's another story.
i think that if OD wants to come back, he'll have to take a significant paycut to do so. i wouldn't be surprised if they let him walk, and i also wouldn't be surprised if they signed him to a 1 year, 1.5 million dollar deal. murray is a must sign, and playing with thornton might be exactly what the b's need w/regards to getting "muzz" inked on a contract. i mean, how can you not like playing w/joe? murray has plenty of money, and he's a guy who loves to shoot that rides shotgun to the best center in the league (who loves to pass). IMO, they'll get it done- maybe 4.5 million per year. knuble is in the same spot as well- he claims to love playing in boston, has a 1st line spot w/the best center in hockey. however, mike might be in a spot to set his family up for life, and if a relatively large offer comes his way, i wouldn't be mad at him for bolting. however, i think a multi year deal for 1.7 million per year is a pretty fair offer from boston. this may be his best opportunity to get the minutes he's getting, and i think he's a 75/25 shot to stick around. money will be the only factor on whether he bolts (thankfully the rangers already had him, and guess they wanted dimaio much more). rolston is so versatile- you have to keep this guy. he's also not a greedy guy from what i can tell, and i think 3-3.5 million per year will keep him in boston. mcgillis- i like the guy a lot. but i do think he's overpaid at 3 million. can boston bring him back for less w/out insulting him? i'd much rather have him at 2 million.
other guys on the UFA list- green and zamuner are both C-ya later. 3.6 million bucks to use towards all the free agents. moran might stick as a #7 for short money. mccarthy, if he keeps up his solid play, will probably be invited back. grosek i can see as the forward version of moran- pay him short money, and he can be the extra guy.
finally, there's potvin, who i see as being 50/50. depends on a few things- how raycroft progresses, whether the cat is ok w/his smaller role, and money (of course).
all in all, it should be a very interesting... summah

neelynugs is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 03:09 PM
  #3
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKH
Just finished listening to the entire Jeff Gorton visit (nice ending wishing his nephew and my kid's classmate good luck in his mite game today); Gorton sounds much like O'Connell and touched on many things interesting but the bantor between Colagio and especially Dupont was very interesting. Gorton says the Bruins by having so few players tied up allows them the most flexibility in the league- but that sounds like a nice way of saying my dad doesn't clean toilets he's a facility maintenance man. To me its dangerous because any other flexible or nonflexible team can go after Rolston, Murray, Knuble, O'Donnell and McGillis...
The way I heard it, Gordon said the Bruins are committed to resigning their key personnel and he listed as examples Thornton, Samsonov, Knuble, Murray and Rolston. He said the Bruins wanted to resign the key players whether their wages were pegged by the old CBA or new CBA and whether the Group IIs went to arbitration or not.

He anticipates that the Bruins' flexibility will save them money in dealing with UFAs. He expects that the new CBA will put downward pressure on UFA wages. When KPD asked what would happen to clubs that have tied up big dollars in player contracts in excess of a new cap, he said that was the sort of thing that would need to be negotiated.

It sounds like sound business thinking to me.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 03:53 PM
  #4
supernova
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neelynugs
DKH- i don't think all 5 of those guys will be back...it's just not likely. however, i think they have a pecking order on them- my personal opinion is that they stack up in this order:
murray, rolston, mcgillis, knuble, o'donnell
one thing to note is that all 5 guys say they LOVE playing here. whether you believe it or not, that's another story.
i think that if OD wants to come back, he'll have to take a significant paycut to do so. i wouldn't be surprised if they let him walk, and i also wouldn't be surprised if they signed him to a 1 year, 1.5 million dollar deal. murray is a must sign, and playing with thornton might be exactly what the b's need w/regards to getting "muzz" inked on a contract. i mean, how can you not like playing w/joe? murray has plenty of money, and he's a guy who loves to shoot that rides shotgun to the best center in the league (who loves to pass). IMO, they'll get it done- maybe 4.5 million per year. knuble is in the same spot as well- he claims to love playing in boston, has a 1st line spot w/the best center in hockey. however, mike might be in a spot to set his family up for life, and if a relatively large offer comes his way, i wouldn't be mad at him for bolting. however, i think a multi year deal for 1.7 million per year is a pretty fair offer from boston. this may be his best opportunity to get the minutes he's getting, and i think he's a 75/25 shot to stick around. money will be the only factor on whether he bolts (thankfully the rangers already had him, and guess they wanted dimaio much more). rolston is so versatile- you have to keep this guy. he's also not a greedy guy from what i can tell, and i think 3-3.5 million per year will keep him in boston. mcgillis- i like the guy a lot. but i do think he's overpaid at 3 million. can boston bring him back for less w/out insulting him? i'd much rather have him at 2 million.
other guys on the UFA list- green and zamuner are both C-ya later. 3.6 million bucks to use towards all the free agents. moran might stick as a #7 for short money. mccarthy, if he keeps up his solid play, will probably be invited back. grosek i can see as the forward version of moran- pay him short money, and he can be the extra guy.
finally, there's potvin, who i see as being 50/50. depends on a few things- how raycroft progresses, whether the cat is ok w/his smaller role, and money (of course).
all in all, it should be a very interesting... summah
If I'm Knuble's agent, I'd be pointing at Samsonov's contract, LaPointe's, and even Zaumner's as I tell OC to show me the money. A big strong guy who has the tools to bury 30 and is willing and able to stand in front of the net should be compensated as such. The brass is going to pay Samsonov 3-4 million more than my client? Why's that exactly, because his dipsy doodles bring more fans to the rink? He's the future of the Bs? He's a more complete player? I dunno, that wouldn't sit too well with me if I were Knuble or his agent. Look around the league and take notice of some of the bums that are making double what Knuble is.

supernova is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 04:06 PM
  #5
mmmBeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
I tried to add up the numbers to figure out exactly how flexible the Bruins are.
This was a topic of discussion over the summer as well, but I think that we should naturally have a better idea of where the Bruins stand regarding the CBA as we get closer to it.
Anyways, the obvious assumption is that the Cap will be set at $31M, which may or may not be realistic, but that's what the owners are aiming for and what the Bruins have in mind.
If I'm not mistaken, the Bruins currently have $9.625 (31% of the cap)tied up past this summer, divided amongst 5 players - LaPointe ($5M), Boynton (1.55M), Axelsson ($1.3M), Bergeron ($.9M), and Zinovjev (.875M).
Thus, they have a little over $21M to sign their top line (including their best player and Captain); their most dynamic winger; their most versatile player (who happens to be a UFA); their #1 goalie; a defense; and, less specifically, enough players to field a team.
Thornton and Samsonov, the two highest profile RFA's, should cost between $8M and $10M. If we assume $8M, you have roughly $18M (58% of the cap) tied up between 7 players.
Then they want to sign Rolston, Knuble, and Murray. Let’s just assume Rolston ($3.175M) and Murray ($3.85) get no raise at all, and Knuble doubles his salary to $1.6M. There’s another $8.625M.
So now, between 10 players, you have $26M (84% of the cap) tied up, and I think that’s a very conservative estimate - I didn't give anyone a raise except for Knuble.
Regardless. you now have roughly $5M to sign Jillson and Raycroft, your two most important remaining free agents. And then you still need another 8 players to legally field a team.
If that’s flexible, then exactly how foolish is the rest of the league?
On the plus side, the Bruins have a number of prospects who should be able to start making an impact, and who are naturally cheap.
Also, as I see it, the only thing making the Bruins inflexible is LaPointe’s contract. Perhaps UFA contracts will be grandfathered into the new cap – otherwise I don’t see how teams like the Rangers will ever get under it.
So, my assessment is, I still don't know. Without LaPointe's contract I think they're very flexible. With it... not so sure.

mmmBeer is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 07:16 PM
  #6
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBBBruin
I tried to add up the numbers to figure out exactly how flexible the Bruins are.
This was a topic of discussion over the summer as well, but I think that we should naturally have a better idea of where the Bruins stand regarding the CBA as we get closer to it.
Anyways, the obvious assumption is that the Cap will be set at $31M, which may or may not be realistic, but that's what the owners are aiming for and what the Bruins have in mind.
If I'm not mistaken, the Bruins currently have $9.625 (31% of the cap)tied up past this summer, divided amongst 5 players - LaPointe ($5M), Boynton (1.55M), Axelsson ($1.3M), Bergeron ($.9M), and Zinovjev (.875M).
Thus, they have a little over $21M to sign their top line (including their best player and Captain); their most dynamic winger; their most versatile player (who happens to be a UFA); their #1 goalie; a defense; and, less specifically, enough players to field a team.
Thornton and Samsonov, the two highest profile RFA's, should cost between $8M and $10M. If we assume $8M, you have roughly $18M (58% of the cap) tied up between 7 players.
Then they want to sign Rolston, Knuble, and Murray. Let’s just assume Rolston ($3.175M) and Murray ($3.85) get no raise at all, and Knuble doubles his salary to $1.6M. There’s another $8.625M.
So now, between 10 players, you have $26M (84% of the cap) tied up, and I think that’s a very conservative estimate - I didn't give anyone a raise except for Knuble.
Regardless. you now have roughly $5M to sign Jillson and Raycroft, your two most important remaining free agents. And then you still need another 8 players to legally field a team.
If that’s flexible, then exactly how foolish is the rest of the league?
On the plus side, the Bruins have a number of prospects who should be able to start making an impact, and who are naturally cheap.
Also, as I see it, the only thing making the Bruins inflexible is LaPointe’s contract. Perhaps UFA contracts will be grandfathered into the new cap – otherwise I don’t see how teams like the Rangers will ever get under it.
So, my assessment is, I still don't know. Without LaPointe's contract I think they're very flexible. With it... not so sure.
During yesterday's NEHJ radio show, KPD cited numbers from a Hockey News article that ranked how much money in player contracts each NHL team had tied up. He said the Bruins had the least amount of money tied up at the end of the current CBA. Jeff Gordon didn't disagree with that assessment.

I would guess that $31 million cap figure is a negotiating point likely to rise.


Last edited by misterjaggers: 11-29-2003 at 07:22 PM.
misterjaggers is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 08:20 PM
  #7
mmmBeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers
During yesterday's NEHJ radio show, KPD cited numbers from a Hockey News article that ranked how much money in player contracts each NHL team had tied up. He said the Bruins had the least amount of money tied up at the end of the current CBA. Jeff Gordon didn't disagree with that assessment.

I would guess that $31 million cap figure is a negotiating point likely to rise.
You could be right about the cap figure rising, but also keep in mind that my player salary estimates were very conservative. Samsonov and Thornton currently make more than I projected their salaries to be next year - they're taking a pay cut in my scenario. Rolston and Murray get no raise in my scenario. I gave the Bruins the benefit of the doubt because I'm not sure that the $31M cap is feasible.

Regarding the Bruins having the least amount of money tied up past the CBA, that's a natural extension of them having the fewest players signed beyond the CBA - my figure was $9.65M. Does this make them more flexible than the rest of the league? I'm not so sure. They'll still have to pay 15 other guys in order to field a team next year, regardless of how much money is tied up right now.

For instance, the Bruins don’t have Samsonov and Thornton signed beyond next season. So they are not included in THN’s figures. But, the Bruins will still have to pay Thornton and Samsonov, if they want those two to play for them. That’s what I was attempting to do in my post – project how close to the Cap they’ll be when they actually do sign all of the important players they would like to sign.

Because I don't see how not having these guys signed makes the team flexible. They'll have to sign them at some point, right? If they had them signed for cheap contracts beyond the CBA, that makes the team flexible. Having a second line center signed for .9M makes the team flexible. But I don't see how having an abundance of UFAs and RFAs makes them flexible.


Last edited by mmmBeer: 11-29-2003 at 08:30 PM.
mmmBeer is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 11:36 PM
  #8
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBBBruin
You could be right about the cap figure rising, but also keep in mind that my player salary estimates were very conservative. Samsonov and Thornton currently make more than I projected their salaries to be next year - they're taking a pay cut in my scenario. Rolston and Murray get no raise in my scenario. I gave the Bruins the benefit of the doubt because I'm not sure that the $31M cap is feasible.

Regarding the Bruins having the least amount of money tied up past the CBA, that's a natural extension of them having the fewest players signed beyond the CBA - my figure was $9.65M. Does this make them more flexible than the rest of the league? I'm not so sure. They'll still have to pay 15 other guys in order to field a team next year, regardless of how much money is tied up right now.

For instance, the Bruins don’t have Samsonov and Thornton signed beyond next season. So they are not included in THN’s figures. But, the Bruins will still have to pay Thornton and Samsonov, if they want those two to play for them. That’s what I was attempting to do in my post – project how close to the Cap they’ll be when they actually do sign all of the important players they would like to sign.

Because I don't see how not having these guys signed makes the team flexible. They'll have to sign them at some point, right? If they had them signed for cheap contracts beyond the CBA, that makes the team flexible. Having a second line center signed for .9M makes the team flexible. But I don't see how having an abundance of UFAs and RFAs makes them flexible.
Teams that have players locked into long-term contracts set at current market rates (under the old CBA)--like Vancouver with Bertuzzi--will be paying relatively more for their services over the length of the contract than the Bruins will pay for Thornton signing him to a one year deal in the summer and then next season shelling out relatively less money to resign him under a new cap. Also, there will be lots of UFAs available from many teams this summer and teams trying to squeeze under the upcoming cap will be frugal with their offers, stifling salary inflation. So, the Bruins' flexibility will save them money.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 12:58 AM
  #9
mmmBeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers
Teams that have players locked into long-term contracts set at current market rates (under the old CBA)--like Vancouver with Bertuzzi--will be paying relatively more for their services over the length of the contract than the Bruins will pay for Thornton signing him to a one year deal in the summer and then next season shelling out relatively less money to resign him under a new cap. Also, there will be lots of UFAs available from many teams this summer and teams trying to squeeze under the upcoming cap will be frugal with their offers, stifling salary inflation. So, the Bruins' flexibility will save them money.
After reading your post I remember this discussion being played out last week - and I don't know why I forgot about it.

But, you're right, under this scenario the Bruins have some flexibility. If the new CBA affects a downward trend in salaries, the Bruins will save money by having few players signed past this season. I don't know why that logic escaped me.

I won't try to argue this or anything; that's the Bruins position. Its a viable stance. We'll have to wait and see if it plays out the way they hope.

However, I stand by my original post. Much of the flexibility potentially gained by having so few players signed past the CBA is negated by LaPointe's contract. Nothing profound, and probably not worth the effort I put into these posts... but there you have it, my thought for the day.

mmmBeer is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 05:16 AM
  #10
Jeff from Maine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,671
vCash: 500
Some Questions

A few questions...

1. Thornton...whey will he sign for relatively less than waht Bertuzzi signed for? Most market observors feel that the top level guys will still get their big money deals. Thornton, Iginla, Kovalchuk and guys like that will stil get their 9-11 million dollar deals, unless they take a discount to stay in one place. Its more likely to be the mid tier guys who get slammed by the whole mess.

2. I know its just a guess...but I would think that Thornton and Sammy get closer to 12-13 million between them next summer, rather that 8-10. These 2 will get substantial raises. After this past negotiation...do you see Sammy bending AGAIN for this franchise? He has done it twice now...I cant see him doing it again.

3. 31 million for a Cap looks low. I bet its closer to 38 when its all said and done. And it will likley be phased in. The NHL will NOT allow teams like Toronto, Colorado, Boston, Dallas, Philly, Detroit to be negatively impacted by a restructuring...no way!

That said..how in the heck can anyone logically say that the B`s will be more flexible than anyone else? Add EVERYTHING up...

Just to resign their KEY guys, will take up virtually 75-95% of the cap!

And we are not even counting adding UPGRADES to the roster!

Lost of people talk about other teams having all of this money that is already tied up...and how bad thats supposed to be.

Well, considering that for many ofthese so called "screwed" teams, the tied up money is invested in their "star" players...they may well be in pretty darned good shape themselves.

We have a lot of cap rom...but need to sign almost an ENTIRE team with it.

Others dont have the cap room, but have much less that needs to be done to get the house in order.

Its 6 of one and a half dozen of the other...

Later

Jeff from Maine is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 06:22 AM
  #11
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff from Maine
A few questions...

1. Thornton...whey will he sign for relatively less than waht Bertuzzi signed for? Most market observors feel that the top level guys will still get their big money deals. Thornton, Iginla, Kovalchuk and guys like that will stil get their 9-11 million dollar deals, unless they take a discount to stay in one place. Its more likely to be the mid tier guys who get slammed by the whole mess.

2. I know its just a guess...but I would think that Thornton and Sammy get closer to 12-13 million between them next summer, rather that 8-10. These 2 will get substantial raises. After this past negotiation...do you see Sammy bending AGAIN for this franchise? He has done it twice now...I cant see him doing it again.

3. 31 million for a Cap looks low. I bet its closer to 38 when its all said and done. And it will likley be phased in. The NHL will NOT allow teams like Toronto, Colorado, Boston, Dallas, Philly, Detroit to be negatively impacted by a restructuring...no way!

That said..how in the heck can anyone logically say that the B`s will be more flexible than anyone else? Add EVERYTHING up...

Just to resign their KEY guys, will take up virtually 75-95% of the cap!

And we are not even counting adding UPGRADES to the roster!

Lost of people talk about other teams having all of this money that is already tied up...and how bad thats supposed to be.

Well, considering that for many ofthese so called "screwed" teams, the tied up money is invested in their "star" players...they may well be in pretty darned good shape themselves.

We have a lot of cap rom...but need to sign almost an ENTIRE team with it.

Others dont have the cap room, but have much less that needs to be done to get the house in order.

Its 6 of one and a half dozen of the other...

Later
The trend under the old CBA was rising player salaries. Let's say that under the old CBA the average player salary rises by x % a year. Well, the Bruins (and I) anticipate that the average player salary under the new capped CBA (and even anticipating it to some extent) will rise at a slower rate on average of, say, x-1% per season. Therefore teams like the Canucks--who have already negotiated long-term deals with guys like Bertuzzi--will be paying more for their players (relatively speaking) in the out years of the contract than teams like the Bruins who stuck with one year contracts. Why? Because the labor market changes post-cap slowing the rate of increase of player wages.

Yes, the impact will vary depending on whether a player is a marquee player or a lesser light, but in general the cap will encourage owners to exercise more restraint than they do now.

Capiche?


Last edited by misterjaggers: 11-30-2003 at 06:54 AM.
misterjaggers is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 07:08 AM
  #12
neelynugs
Registered User
 
neelynugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Vote Quimby!
Posts: 29,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff from Maine
After this past negotiation...do you see Sammy bending AGAIN for this franchise? He has done it twice now...I cant see him doing it again.
sorry jeff, but if anyone "bent", it was OC. how is samsonov getting the raw deal here? 3.65 million plus bonuses is pretty generous IMO. don't get me wrong, i like samsonov as much as the next guy, but how is he worth A LOT MORE than that? answer- he isn't.

neelynugs is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 07:21 AM
  #13
supernova
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neelynugs
sorry jeff, but if anyone "bent", it was OC. how is samsonov getting the raw deal here? 3.65 million plus bonuses is pretty generous IMO. don't get me wrong, i like samsonov as much as the next guy, but how is he worth A LOT MORE than that? answer- he isn't.
3.65 plus bonuses sounds like he's, " One contract ahead of himself."

supernova is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 09:44 AM
  #14
Jeff from Maine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,671
vCash: 500
What Matters Is..

What matters is not what you think his worth is, or what I think his worth is.

It is what SAMSONOV and his AGENT think he is worth. They dropped their demand considerably this summer in order to get into camp. estimates are that they dropped by close to 2 million dollars.

This is the second time that Samsonov has done this.

Who cares what he is worth? All that matters is that if he feels he is worth such and such money, and Boston continually refuses to give him his coin...

Eventually he WILL find a way out of town.

And if he continues his play of this season...expect a healthy raise for next season.

If you for a second believe that he will play next year for what he is making this year...your nuts!

He WILL demand a good raise.

Later

Jeff from Maine is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 10:53 AM
  #15
hubofhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,936
vCash: 500
samsonov

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff from Maine
What matters is not what you think his worth is, or what I think his worth is.

It is what SAMSONOV and his AGENT think he is worth. They dropped their demand considerably this summer in order to get into camp. estimates are that they dropped by close to 2 million dollars.

This is the second time that Samsonov has done this.

Who cares what he is worth? All that matters is that if he feels he is worth such and such money, and Boston continually refuses to give him his coin...

Eventually he WILL find a way out of town.

And if he continues his play of this season...expect a healthy raise for next season.

If you for a second believe that he will play next year for what he is making this year...your nuts!

He WILL demand a good raise.

Later



My guess here: Samsonov won't bother negotiating this summer, and instead will select arbitration. Remember, the team has been on record for nearly two years now, choosing not to tie up anyone at serious money until the CBA is settled.
Samsonov now on pace for about a 60-point season (22 games/15 points). Arb is all about numbers, and I'm not sure what kind of a bump an arbitrator will give him over his current $3.65 million--unless he can get hot here over the last 60 games and bring, say,85-90 points to the table (then he's around $5 million or better).
Jumbo Joe ($5.5M base now) also likely to land in arb. The B's then have them tied up for one year (two, if they choose, but they won't), with hope that Bettman can knuckle the PA to the ground (not a great bet, given PA's history last 10-12 years.
But, hey, that's why they play the CBA, right? hoh/kpd

hubofhockey is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 11:02 AM
  #16
Bruwinz37
Registered User
 
Bruwinz37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 26,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff from Maine
What matters is not what you think his worth is, or what I think his worth is.

It is what SAMSONOV and his AGENT think he is worth. They dropped their demand considerably this summer in order to get into camp. estimates are that they dropped by close to 2 million dollars.

This is the second time that Samsonov has done this.

Who cares what he is worth? All that matters is that if he feels he is worth such and such money, and Boston continually refuses to give him his coin...

Eventually he WILL find a way out of town.

And if he continues his play of this season...expect a healthy raise for next season.

If you for a second believe that he will play next year for what he is making this year...your nuts!

He WILL demand a good raise.

Later
And those are the facts, folks. Why bother discussing further?

Bruwinz37 is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 11:30 AM
  #17
neelynugs
Registered User
 
neelynugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Vote Quimby!
Posts: 29,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff from Maine
Eventually he WILL find a way out of town.
ok neil abbott

neelynugs is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 12:02 PM
  #18
mmmBeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff from Maine
2. I know its just a guess...but I would think that Thornton and Sammy get closer to 12-13 million between them next summer, rather that 8-10. These 2 will get substantial raises. After this past negotiation...do you see Sammy bending AGAIN for this franchise? He has done it twice now...I cant see him doing it again.

3. 31 million for a Cap looks low. I bet its closer to 38 when its all said and done. And it will likley be phased in. The NHL will NOT allow teams like Toronto, Colorado, Boston, Dallas, Philly, Detroit to be negatively impacted by a restructuring...no way!

That said..how in the heck can anyone logically say that the B`s will be more flexible than anyone else? Add EVERYTHING up...

Just to resign their KEY guys, will take up virtually 75-95% of the cap!
I realize my estimate for Thornton and Sammy are low - my estimates for everyone were pretty low. I realize that the $31M cap is also probably a low figure. But I think that, since the figures I projected for both are low, the percentage of the cap used that I projected is still fairly accurate, despite the fact that the exact figures are probably off.

And, as you said, the percentages indicate that most of the cap will be used up by re-signing 12 key players.

I don't expect anyone to take my projections as fact or anything, I just used them to try to get an idea of where the Bruins stand.

Anyways, here's the status of the individuals this summer:

Centers:
Thornton (RFA - Arbitration rights)
Rolston (UFA)
Bergeron (signed 3 yrs – 900K)
Zinovjev (signed 3 yrs - 875K)
Vernarsky (signed)
Green (UFA)

Wings:
Samsonov (RFA - arbitration rights)
LaPointe (signed 2 yrs – 5M)
Axelsson (signed 2 yrs – 1.3M)
Knuble (UFA)
McCarthy (UFA)
Murray (UFA)
Zamuner (UFA)
Huml (RFA)
Hilbert (signed)
Sammuelsson (signed)
Grosek (RFA)

Defensemen:
Boynton (signed 2 yrs - 1.55M)
Jillson (RFA)
Gill (RFA/UFA - if the age is dropped to 28 as I expect he'll be UFA)
Girard (RFA)
Morrisson (signed)
Jonsson (hasn’t signed first contract)
Jurcina (signed)
Kutlak (RFA)
McGillis (UFA)
Moran (UFA)
O’Donnell (UFA)

Goalies:
Raycroft (RFA)
Potvin (UFA)
Toivenin (signed)

Edit: the yrs left on the contract include this season.


Last edited by mmmBeer: 11-30-2003 at 12:15 PM.
mmmBeer is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 12:17 PM
  #19
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBBBruin
I realize my estimate for Thornton and Sammy are low - my estimates for everyone were pretty low. I realize that the $31M cap is also probably a low figure. But I think that, since the figures I projected for both are low, the percentage of the cap used that I projected is still fairly accurate, despite the fact that the exact figures are probably off.

And, as you said, the percentages indicate that most of the cap will be used up by re-signing 12 key players.

I don't expect anyone to take my projections as fact or anything, I just used them to try to get an idea of where the Bruins stand.

Anyways, here's the status of the individuals this summer:

Centers:
Thornton (RFA - Arbitration rights)
Rolston (UFA)
Bergeron (signed 3 yrs – 900K)
Zinovjev (signed 3 yrs - 875K)
Vernarsky (signed)
Green (UFA)

Wings:
Samsonov (RFA - arbitration rights)
LaPointe (signed 2 yrs – 5M)
Axelsson (signed 2 yrs – 1.3M)
Knuble (UFA)
McCarthy (UFA)
Murray (UFA)
Zamuner (UFA)
Huml (RFA)
Hilbert (signed)
Sammuelsson (signed)
Grosek (RFA)

Defensemen:
Boynton (signed 2 yrs - 1.55M)
Jillson (RFA)
Gill (RFA/UFA - if the age is dropped to 28 as I expect he'll be UFA)
Girard (RFA)
Morrisson (signed)
Jonsson (hasn’t signed first contract)
Jurcina (signed)
Kutlak (RFA)
McGillis (UFA)
Moran (UFA)
O’Donnell (UFA)

Goalies:
Raycroft (RFA)
Potvin (UFA)
Toivenin (signed)
No amount of estimating or calculating changes the fact that the less future dollars a team has tied up going into a new post-cap CBA era, the better. The Bruins have smartly positioned themselves to take maximum advantage of the projected change in the labor market.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 12:38 PM
  #20
mmmBeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers
No amount of estimating or calculating changes the fact that the less future dollars a team has tied up going into a new post-cap CBA era, the better. The Bruins have smartly positioned themselves to take maximum advantage of the projected change in the labor market.
I would argue that where you do or don't have those future dollars tied up is also a factor.
If you have $5M future dollars tied up in a 3rd liner, and you don't have any future dollars tied up in your key players, you are taking a risk.
But, no time to expand on it, gotta get back to Amherst.

mmmBeer is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 01:24 PM
  #21
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBBBruin
I would argue that where you do or don't have those future dollars tied up is also a factor.
If you have $5M future dollars tied up in a 3rd liner, and you don't have any future dollars tied up in your key players, you are taking a risk.
But, no time to expand on it, gotta get back to Amherst.
The decision to sign Lapointe to a generous multi-year contract pre-dates any planning done to position the team for the new CBA.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 03:33 PM
  #22
mmmBeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers
The decision to sign Lapointe to a generous multi-year contract pre-dates any planning done to position the team for the new CBA.
But its still a factor when figuring out how flexible the Bruins are - which is what I'm trying to do, not bash management.

Any downward trend in salaries after the new CBA is much more likely to affect the LaPointe's of the league than Thornton or Samsonov. Salary Cap or not, those are the guys who are gonna sell tickets.

mmmBeer 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 12:47 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.