HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Time to Honour Bure?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-13-2010, 12:44 PM
  #76
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Well at least Nonis didn't try and cheat Naslund by pulling a "bait and switch" (re: paying him in CDN$ instead of US$ back when the exchange rate was something like $1.2CDN=$1US) like Quinn did.
That's one of the things that sticks out in my mind about Bure's mistreatment.

We can say what we'd like about Bure, and sure, he had some questionable antics as well(renegotiating a contract mid-term? Never happens), but the way he was treated by Canuck management was deplorable.

Can you imagine if current Canuck management treated the Sedins, Kesler or Luongo this way? You think we'd have managed to lure UFAs like Hamhuis here if we did that?

Maybe this is a vital cog in why it took so long for the Canucks to lure marquee talent here via the free agent market. And there's also the well publicised boondoggle of the Gretzky negotiation that Quinn screwed up...

Mr. Canucklehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 01:01 PM
  #77
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,166
vCash: 500
I like Pavel, but you do not honour any player that dishonours your organisation. It's as simple as that.

silvercanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 01:10 PM
  #78
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,945
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
I like Pavel, but you do not honour any player that dishonours your organisation. It's as simple as that.
Naslund asked for a trade too. What's so different between the two players?

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 01:29 PM
  #79
CallMeJerry
Registered User
 
CallMeJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
I like Pavel, but you do not honour any player that dishonours your organisation. It's as simple as that.
Canadiens fans and Patrick Roy disagree.

CallMeJerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 01:45 PM
  #80
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,945
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
With the retirement of Naslund's number, there's absolutely no way anyone can argue against retiring Bure's number.

And then it comes down to, hey, look at an organization that hasn't won anything and how they've retired FOUR numbers already.


y2kcanucks is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 02:25 PM
  #81
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
Bure didn't accomplish nearly as much personally, he only played 428 regular season games (and 488 between the playoffs and regular season) as a Canuck, he wasn't the team's leading scorer when he retired, he wasn't the team's captain, and he wasn't known for being dedicated to the community like Smyl, Linden, and Naslund were.

I don't have a problem with retiring his number given the numbers that have been retired (if it were me the Canucks wouldn't have any retired numbers yet) but Bure's working with a resume that is completely different than the three players who have had their numbers retired. He doesn't really fit the precedent that has been set.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 03:35 PM
  #82
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeJerry View Post
Canadiens fans and Patrick Roy disagree.
Roy said it's the coach or me. His ousting didnt have that much to do with the rest of the organisation. He didn't sit out for months while he was under contract either.

Roy also makes a better case for why his number should be retired. He single handedly won two cups with teams that really had no business winning anything. Bure was one of the greatest Canucks for sure but the length of his stay really does not justify his number being retired.

Bure was more like a paid employee than a player that gave everything to this organisation. He didn't put in the time and never gave anything extra while he was here. It was all about himself.

The thing that really kills me is that Bure wanted out of Vancouver during his entire stay here. How can you possibly retire a player's number that never wanted to be here?

The one honour Bure does deserve is a spot in the Hockey Hall of Fame. That to me is a no-brainer.

silvercanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 04:01 PM
  #83
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeJerry View Post
Canadiens fans and Patrick Roy disagree.
when did the habs retire mario tremblay and rejean houle's numbers?

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 05:03 PM
  #84
magumbo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
he should have been up there a long time ago, he was our first legitamate allstar imo. back then when the rest of the league looked at vancouver sorry to say they didnt think of linden or kirk or any of the guys we honor, they new us because of bure. even though he didnt leave in the best fashon he still took this franchise and took it to a respectable level.......im just sayin

magumbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 05:17 PM
  #85
HeadLikeAnOrange*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,125
vCash: 500
Water under the bridge, let's move on.


HeadLikeAnOrange* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 05:31 PM
  #86
Pascha
Registered User
 
Pascha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Sea to Sky country
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,333
vCash: 500
He played here for 7 years, and is still the 4th leading goal scorer in team history despite playing more than 400 games less than the 3 guys above him. Nobody in Canucks history is even close to as prolific a scorer as Pavel... and when it came to the playoffs, he raised his game and continued to score.

He was the team's first and only true superstar.

To hang the "lack of involvement in the community" on a young man who came here not speaking any English, who had very serious issues with Canucks management's mistreatment of his contract situation (perceived or not) seems to smack of people wanting to find reasons to hate the guy.

It's time to right the wrongs that were done on both sides, and honour him in some fashion. Bury the hatchet. If you don't want your tickets to "Pavel Bure Night", or if you simply want to go to be an ass, then I'm sure there are lots of people who would love to go and cheer for the best player to ever pull on a Canucks jersey.

When he goes to the Hall, he goes in as a Canuck.

Pascha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 05:43 PM
  #87
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,945
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pascha View Post
He played here for 7 years, and is still the 4th leading goal scorer in team history despite playing more than 400 games less than the 3 guys above him. Nobody in Canucks history is even close to as prolific a scorer as Pavel... and when it came to the playoffs, he raised his game and continued to score.

He was the team's first and only true superstar.

To hang the "lack of involvement in the community" on a young man who came here not speaking any English, who had very serious issues with Canucks management's mistreatment of his contract situation (perceived or not) seems to smack of people wanting to find reasons to hate the guy.

It's time to right the wrongs that were done on both sides, and honour him in some fashion. Bury the hatchet. If you don't want your tickets to "Pavel Bure Night", or if you simply want to go to be an ass, then I'm sure there are lots of people who would love to go and cheer for the best player to ever pull on a Canucks jersey.

When he goes to the Hall, he goes in as a Canuck.
Agreed. I don't think you can realistically retire Naslund's jersey and not retire Bure's.

y2kcanucks is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 06:09 PM
  #88
kootenayfan
Registered User
 
kootenayfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southeastern BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pascha View Post
He played here for 7 years, and is still the 4th leading goal scorer in team history despite playing more than 400 games less than the 3 guys above him. Nobody in Canucks history is even close to as prolific a scorer as Pavel... and when it came to the playoffs, he raised his game and continued to score.

He was the team's first and only true superstar.

To hang the "lack of involvement in the community" on a young man who came here not speaking any English, who had very serious issues with Canucks management's mistreatment of his contract situation (perceived or not) seems to smack of people wanting to find reasons to hate the guy.

It's time to right the wrongs that were done on both sides, and honour him in some fashion. Bury the hatchet. If you don't want your tickets to "Pavel Bure Night", or if you simply want to go to be an ass, then I'm sure there are lots of people who would love to go and cheer for the best player to ever pull on a Canucks jersey.

When he goes to the Hall, he goes in as a Canuck.
Totally agree!

kootenayfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 06:28 PM
  #89
skg
Registered User
 
skg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,169
vCash: 500
Anyone who thinks Bure "dishonoured" the organization by demanding to be traded, should read "The Riddle of the Russian Rocket" by Kerry Banks. It offers a interesting account of how Canuck management nickel and dimed Bure so much (such as paying him in Canadian $ rather than US $), it led to his eventual request to be traded.

I would fully support #10 being raised to the rafters.

skg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 06:44 PM
  #90
vancityluongo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,350
vCash: 500
Based on the other three jerseys up there, I think Bure should go up. However, I don't think he will, and will just be a part of the ring of honour, along with Ohlund.

Personally though, I'm not too sure why everyone whines about "OMG the Canucks can't retire four jerseys, they haven't won anything!!". The team has been around for 40 years. Out of 40 years of hockey in the city of Vancouver, the team has honoured 3 players from that timespan. Is that really all that much? Go ahead and add another to that in Bure IMO, and add the Sedins when they're finished here too. 50 years and 6 players would not be that much, although hopefully there's a cup or two by then, and we can actually have some accomplishments to celebrate.

vancityluongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 07:39 PM
  #91
kanuck87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauser View Post
Agreed. I don't think you can realistically retire Naslund's jersey and not retire Bure's.
Which is why, for the sake of legitimacy, we need to retire a player's number who actually had a HOF career with us. The standard needs to be set fairly high. I'm not saying Naslund didn't have a great career with us, I'm just saying he didn't really have that sustained superstardom (only a 3 season span) nor did he ever lead the team past the 2nd round for me to consider retiring his number. Using him as a standard, it would be too easy to make arguments for other players in the future. We'll inevitably see one or two guys every era who, like Naslund, was a great player who spends the majority of their careers with us, but never led the team very deep into the playoffs.

I really hope the Sedins are able to boost themselves into HOF level and/or take us to the cup. Based on Naslund's inclusion, they're well on their way to getting their numbers retired too, but if they can achieve one or both of those accomplishments, it would finally set the bar to a level where if you want your number up there, you really would have had to do something spectacular individually or as a team.

kanuck87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 10:43 PM
  #92
Hal 9000*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by skg View Post
Anyone who thinks Bure "dishonoured" the organization by demanding to be traded, should read "The Riddle of the Russian Rocket" by Kerry Banks. It offers a interesting account of how Canuck management nickel and dimed Bure so much (such as paying him in Canadian $ rather than US $), it led to his eventual request to be traded.

I would fully support #10 being raised to the rafters.
Canucks paid the entire $250K to the russians.

Also, speaking of nickel and diming. Were the Canucks nickel and diming when they signed Bure to $700K per year while Larionov was making $300k, Fedorov $300k, Lidstrom $300k and Mogilny $175K.?

Hal 9000* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 10:51 PM
  #93
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pascha View Post
When he goes to the Hall, he goes in as a Canuck.
Yup, that's about the crux of the argument for me.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2010, 10:59 PM
  #94
Hal 9000*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Yup, that's about the crux of the argument for me.

It's not like baseball. You don't designate a team, you just go in.

Hal 9000* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2010, 12:39 AM
  #95
Lard_Lad
Registered User
 
Lard_Lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vancityluongo View Post
Personally though, I'm not too sure why everyone whines about "OMG the Canucks can't retire four jerseys, they haven't won anything!!". The team has been around for 40 years. Out of 40 years of hockey in the city of Vancouver, the team has honoured 3 players from that timespan. Is that really all that much?
Some perspective on that: of the five franchises who came into the league in the pre-WHA merger expansions and haven't won a cup yet, we've retired the fewest numbers. The Caps have four, Kings five, Blues and Sabres six.

Lard_Lad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2010, 12:42 AM
  #96
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal 9000 View Post
Canucks paid the entire $250K to the russians.

Also, speaking of nickel and diming. Were the Canucks nickel and diming when they signed Bure to $700K per year while Larionov was making $300k, Fedorov $300k, Lidstrom $300k and Mogilny $175K.?
No the Canucks did not pay the entire $250,000 - Bure paid $50,000 of his own transfer fee out of his signing bonus from his initial contract.
After nearly six hours of sensitive negotiations in Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Kathleen MacDonald's chambers, Red Army general manager Valery Gushin agreed to accept a $250,000 US transfer fee for Bure's rights. Vancouver had consented to pay no more than $200,000 and when the two sides appeared to near an impasse that might have delayed Bure's career at least another month, the 20-year-old right winger agreed to kick in the rest.
Bure kicks in $50,000 to help make transfer deal with Soviets; [1* Edition] KEITH GAVE. The Vancouver Sun. Vancouver, B.C.: Nov 1, 1991. pg. D.10

The club was waiting to settle a court case with the Russian Red Army team that had Bure under contract. The Canucks ended up buying out those rights for $250,000. Bure had to chip in $50,000 of it out of his first contract to pay off the Russians.
Why I wanted out: Bure finally lists reasons why he demanded trade from Vancouver; [Final C Edition]Tony Gallagher. The Province. Vancouver, B.C.: Jan 20, 1999. pg. A.52.FR
The cost of that release was $250,000. The club paid $200,000. Bure had to pay the other $50,000.

The day before the court judgment, Bure agreed to a contract worth $600,000 annually. But there was an understanding, he said, that if he proved he was a solid NHL player, a new deal would be written.
Rocket blasts off - In an exclusive interview, Pavel Bure says management's chintziness doomed relations with Canucks from the start Wednesday, January 20, 1999 by AL STRACHAN -- TORONTO SUN

At the time Bure arrived the top players were beginning to push the envelope on salaries that were about to take a massive jump under Bob Goodenow.

In 1991-92 when Bure was paid $600,00 the top players:
Wayne Gretzky (Los Angeles Kings) $3 million
Mario Lemieux (Pittsburgh Penguins) $2.34 million
Brett Hull (St. Louis Blues) $1.5 million
Pat LaFontaine (Buffalo Sabres) $1.4 million
Steve Yzerman (Detroit Red Wings) $1.4 million

And Eric Lindros was just signing his initial contract with the Flyers for $3.5 million per year.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2010, 12:45 AM
  #97
*Injektilo
Registered User
 
*Injektilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: France
Posts: 11,706
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lard_Lad View Post
Some perspective on that: of the five franchises who came into the league in the pre-WHA merger expansions and haven't won a cup yet, we've retired the fewest numbers. The Caps have four, Kings five, Blues and Sabres six.
That is irrelevant, as we shouldn't use as a benchmark the faulty decisions of other franchises, and some of the numbers that _have_ been retired by those franchises were much better than any player who has ever worn a Canuck jersey, and IMO worthy of that honour (Gretzky, Dionne, MacInnis, Hull).

*Injektilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2010, 01:20 AM
  #98
Lard_Lad
Registered User
 
Lard_Lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Injektilo View Post
That is irrelevant, as we shouldn't use as a benchmark the faulty decisions of other franchises, and some of the numbers that _have_ been retired by those franchises were much better than any player who has ever worn a Canuck jersey, and IMO worthy of that honour (Gretzky, Dionne, MacInnis, Hull).
How are those decisions "faulty" and "irrelevant"? Teams in circumstances similar to ours decided that guys whose contributions weren't much different than Bure's or Naslund's were worth honouring in this manner. If Rene Robert or Brian Sutter meant that much to their teams, why is it wrong to put their number up? Does it cheapen the honour for Brett Hull to see Barclay Plager's number up in the rafters, too?

Maybe some people need to lighten up a bit about the gravity of a jersey retirement. We're not carving their likenesses onto the side of a mountain. We're not going to run out of numbers anytime soon. It's just a nice way of keeping the club's history alive. If you really want to get bent out of shape about something like this, worry about the Hall of Fame inductions. There are far more ridiculous things going on there than in the rafters of Rogers Arena.

Lard_Lad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2010, 01:35 AM
  #99
Hal 9000*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
No the Canucks did not pay the entire $250,000 - Bure paid $50,000 of his own transfer fee out of his signing bonus from his initial contract.
After nearly six hours of sensitive negotiations in Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Kathleen MacDonald's chambers, Red Army general manager Valery Gushin agreed to accept a $250,000 US transfer fee for Bure's rights. Vancouver had consented to pay no more than $200,000 and when the two sides appeared to near an impasse that might have delayed Bure's career at least another month, the 20-year-old right winger agreed to kick in the rest.
Bure kicks in $50,000 to help make transfer deal with Soviets; [1* Edition] KEITH GAVE. The Vancouver Sun. Vancouver, B.C.: Nov 1, 1991. pg. D.10

The club was waiting to settle a court case with the Russian Red Army team that had Bure under contract. The Canucks ended up buying out those rights for $250,000. Bure had to chip in $50,000 of it out of his first contract to pay off the Russians.
Why I wanted out: Bure finally lists reasons why he demanded trade from Vancouver; [Final C Edition]Tony Gallagher. The Province. Vancouver, B.C.: Jan 20, 1999. pg. A.52.FR
The cost of that release was $250,000. The club paid $200,000. Bure had to pay the other $50,000.

The day before the court judgment, Bure agreed to a contract worth $600,000 annually. But there was an understanding, he said, that if he proved he was a solid NHL player, a new deal would be written.
Rocket blasts off - In an exclusive interview, Pavel Bure says management's chintziness doomed relations with Canucks from the start Wednesday, January 20, 1999 by AL STRACHAN -- TORONTO SUN

At the time Bure arrived the top players were beginning to push the envelope on salaries that were about to take a massive jump under Bob Goodenow.

In 1991-92 when Bure was paid $600,00 the top players:
Wayne Gretzky (Los Angeles Kings) $3 million
Mario Lemieux (Pittsburgh Penguins) $2.34 million
Brett Hull (St. Louis Blues) $1.5 million
Pat LaFontaine (Buffalo Sabres) $1.4 million
Steve Yzerman (Detroit Red Wings) $1.4 million

And Eric Lindros was just signing his initial contract with the Flyers for $3.5 million per year.
You're comparing Bure to well established stars and team leaders. Bure was an unknown entity at that time and was offered 2-3 times what players in his perr group were making.

There are contradictory opinions of wether Vancouver ended up paying the extra $50k or not but considering that they did give him a signing bonus of some $750 or $800K, I'm sure it was paid at least indirectly by the canucks.

If you actually had any experiance in law or in negotiating you would surely see what was done and why. Negotiations are negotiations, wether you are buying or selling fish, asking for a raise, haggling at a garage sale or negotiating an NHL contract. It's all the same, the incidentals change but not the principles. Personally, I think Burke wanted Bure to pay some of his own expenses (indirectly) to avoid any reprocussions from the Russians or the NHL. Burke is a pretty smart guy and would surely cover all basis in regards to extortion issues or collusion accusations etc. The Idea that the Canucks were simply cheap does not add up. Bure was given more than Fedorov, Mogilny and Lidstom combined, later on he was paid 3rd to only Mario and Wayne - who BTW were bonafide superstars and Stanley cup champions.

If Bure thought he was to be re-negotiated after being R.O.Y, then he needs to question what his agent was doing because that seems to not be anywhere in writing. In fact, listening to Bure and his far fetched ideas, I'd say that most of his problems arrose directly from a lack of communication from his agent and a lack of understanding of the CBA. Maybe that's why Salcer was eventually fired.

Hal 9000* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2010, 02:26 AM
  #100
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal 9000 View Post
You're comparing Bure to well established stars and team leaders. Bure was an unknown entity at that time and was offered 2-3 times what players in his perr group were making.

There are contradictory opinions of wether Vancouver ended up paying the extra $50k or not but considering that they did give him a signing bonus of some $750 or $800K, I'm sure it was paid at least indirectly by the canucks.

If you actually had any experiance in law or in negotiating you would surely see what was done and why. Negotiations are negotiations, wether you are buying or selling fish, asking for a raise, haggling at a garage sale or negotiating an NHL contract. It's all the same, the incidentals change but not the principles. Personally, I think Burke wanted Bure to pay some of his own expenses (indirectly) to avoid any reprocussions from the Russians or the NHL. Burke is a pretty smart guy and would surely cover all basis in regards to extortion issues or collusion accusations etc. The Idea that the Canucks were simply cheap does not add up. Bure was given more than Fedorov, Mogilny and Lidstom combined, later on he was paid 3rd to only Mario and Wayne - who BTW were bonafide superstars and Stanley cup champions.

If Bure thought he was to be re-negotiated after being R.O.Y, then he needs to question what his agent was doing because that seems to not be anywhere in writing. In fact, listening to Bure and his far fetched ideas, I'd say that most of his problems arrose directly from a lack of communication from his agent and a lack of understanding of the CBA. Maybe that's why Salcer was eventually fired.
It is clear that Bure paid part of his own transfer fee ($50,000). You are wrong as you were with your claim that Bure defected.

As I pointed out the player Bure was most compared to as the two top junior players in the world was Lindros - and he subsequently signed his initial contract for $3.5 Million per year with the Flyers.

It is clear you have not negotiated contracts as an agent. In those days a lot of contracts had verbal riders on them - no trade clauses, etc. And in the main they were honoured. The reason many clauses were verbal was because in those days the NHL Central Registry would not accept a contract for registration that had such conditions.

Mind you it is a little ironical because the Canucks represented by Burke as counsel (one of his biggest mistakes thinking he was a litgator) and with Quinn testifying would try to claim that there was an oral agreement with the Russians that they would "forgive" transfer fees in subsequent years if Krutov did not play out his three year deal. The Russians denied any such deal catergorically and pointed out terms in the tranfer fee agreement that ran counter to that interpretation.

And if you think Brian Burke is a smart negotiator then I am quite astonished given his track record.

Pre-salary cap contracts were regularly re-written as with Bertuzzi. Mind you I never saw a player taking less after a bad season or two. Under the current CBA contracts can no longer be voided and replaced.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:46 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.