HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Can Sinden be faulted (or partially) for current state?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-28-2003, 12:01 AM
  #1
nathan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Can Sinden be faulted (or partially) for current state?

I was reading a Philly News sports article.

Quote:
Bill Daly, the NHL's lead negotiator in seeking a new collective-bargaining agreement with the players, criticized Harry Sinden, the Boston Bruins' general manager, for damaging the league with entry-level deals that go back to the rookie contract he gave Joe Thornton. Sinden fired back, insisting that he was proud of holding salaries down.

"The Bruins have been [the NHL's] staunchest allies for about 12 years at the league level," Sinden told the Boston Globe. "The story came out as if the Rangers and the Bruins since 1997 have caused this financial chaos. For a big-market team that's been in the bottom half of the payroll situation for many years [and] took its captain [Ray Bourque] to arbitration because we didn't want to pay him the money.

"[The Bruins] let lots of players go because their demands were too high, put players back in the draft, [had] holdouts every year because we're trying to hold the league line, the league policy, the league philosophy, to have someone come to town and say the two major causes of our problems are the entry-level signing of a certain draft choice [Thornton] in 1997 and to pair that with the offer to Joe Sakic and the Rangers' behavior over these years - at some point, you have to try to defend yourself a little bit."

Yeah, Harry, you took Bourque, a legend, to arbitration, thereby uniting the players across the league against management. You did more harm to the game of hockey than you can ever imagine because you're cheap.

"To do what he did to Ray Bourque, it turned every player in the league against management," one general manager said. "He thought he was being smart. He was being dumb."

Basically, the important part is that Sinden's entry level contract for Joe Thorton has helped to lead escalating salaries along with the Rags' attempted RFA signing of Sakic. I'm not too familiar with Thorton's rookie contract, but is there any truth to that?

Also, did the Ray Bourque arbitration case really have a significant impact as stated?

nathan is offline  
Old
12-28-2003, 10:13 AM
  #2
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
"Sinden fired back, insisting that he was proud of holding salaries down."

Sinden should be reminded that he is paying Martin LaPointe $5 million a year.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
12-28-2003, 12:24 PM
  #3
nathan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
It's like catch-22 for the B's really.

If they gave Allison or Guerin $9 million per year, aren't they contributing to the rise in salaries? Yet, they let them go/sent them packing and are viewed as being cheap.

nathan is offline  
Old
12-28-2003, 01:33 PM
  #4
The Rage
Registered User
 
The Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stamford Bridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan
It's like catch-22 for the B's really.

If they gave Allison or Guerin $9 million per year, aren't they contributing to the rise in salaries? Yet, they let them go/sent them packing and are viewed as being cheap.
Exactly. The Bruins are accused of being cheap and running their team like a business, while other teams are accused of spending too much and not running their teams like a business. The blatant hypocrisy of that astounds me.

The Rage is offline  
Old
12-28-2003, 03:06 PM
  #5
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,182
vCash: 500
I'd blame a lot of teams and people before Sinden.

The Joe Thornton deal or something like that would have happened anyway with any team and any prospect like Lecavalier, Kovalchuk or whomever.

I don't even see rookie contracts for first rounders as being that bad.
The league is only having problems because stiffs like Rob Zamuner are making over $2 million, or old vets who are paid excessively for past performances.

Stephen is offline  
Old
12-28-2003, 09:36 PM
  #6
TJF
Registered User
 
TJF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: London, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,696
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to TJF
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Love
"Sinden fired back, insisting that he was proud of holding salaries down."

Sinden should be reminded that he is paying Martin LaPointe $5 million a year.
Actually Mike O'Connell is the one who gave Martin Lapointe the deal. But that was more of a rivilary between two owners than anything else. At a owners meeting one year Iilitch (Detroit's owner) called out Jacobs (Boston's owner) for letting an orginal 6 team slide down the standings due to his penny pinching ways, Jacobs didn't like that at all. Than during the summer he signed one of Detroit's core players (Lapointe) to a ridiculous deal just to get back at him and prove he was willing to spend money. Too bad he decided to spend it on Lapointe and not someone like Shanahan or Fedorov.

TJF is offline  
Old
12-29-2003, 04:45 AM
  #7
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJF
Actually Mike O'Connell is the one who gave Martin Lapointe the deal. But that was more of a rivilary between two owners than anything else. At a owners meeting one year Iilitch (Detroit's owner) called out Jacobs (Boston's owner) for letting an orginal 6 team slide down the standings due to his penny pinching ways, Jacobs didn't like that at all. Than during the summer he signed one of Detroit's core players (Lapointe) to a ridiculous deal just to get back at him and prove he was willing to spend money. Too bad he decided to spend it on Lapointe and not someone like Shanahan or Fedorov.
D-oh! That's right, my bad.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
12-29-2003, 12:47 PM
  #8
nathan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Personlly, O'Connell should have been more concerned about making his team competitive rather than worry about other owner's feelings.

nathan is offline  
Old
12-29-2003, 09:24 PM
  #9
TJF
Registered User
 
TJF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: London, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,696
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to TJF
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan
Personlly, O'Connell should have been more concerned about making his team competitive rather than worry about other owner's feelings.

The problem with Boston is that the GM is always just the owners puppet. That's why Sinden lasted as long as he did despite not winning anything in since the 70's simply because him and Jacobs both agreed to be penny pinchers and O'Connell is following the the exact foot steps.

TJF is offline  
Old
12-29-2003, 11:57 PM
  #10
mmmBeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
Sinden, and Bruins management in general, for the most part tried to run their business the way the CBA said to.

The CBA says that its okay to overpay players 30 and over. They put in their time, so they can offer their services to anyone in the league, and this competition will naturally drive up their salaries. Therefore, guys like Zamuner get $2M, and guys like LaPointe - even though he became a UFA early - get $5M, even though they probably aren't "worth" that much. The older you get as a player, the more rights you get under the CBA.

The Bruins hard line stance usually applied to younger players. When it was time to re-sign guys like Allison and Carter, Sinden claimed they were "one contract ahead of themselves." They didn't have arbitration rights, or other such rights under the CBA, so Sinden felt it was his duty to the league to play hardball with them.

This has resulted in an organization that has a lot of 3rd and 4th liners making dime, while younger 1st and 2nd liners were jettisoned, but that's neither here nor there. I don't know what my point is, other than that's how it seems to me that the Bruins have run their business. I think Sinden would have liked every organization to use all of the leverage they could when they had leverage, and he ran the Bruins as an example of that philosophy.

Regarding Thornto'n's contract, he also mentioned that he didn't give Thornton anymore than Daigle had gotten even after bonuses, and Joe didn't even make those bonuses. He blamed the teams that gave players bonuses that exceeded Thornton's afterwards. For what its worth.

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 06:41 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.