Optimism Unabated

[AM]

Lol

You mean smart, right? Oh wait, you can't use basic reasoning or logic skills, or even have the gall to look at, gasp, actual results? Gee, well I guess you can continue to have the same misguided opinion if you ignore facts, rationality and reasoning...

3 words, kettle, pot and black.

Everybody elses opinion to the contrary, I know you can put them together.

 

[AM]

Yup!

Doh! He is? I thought he was the comic relief. I mean, I thought you had to be deliberately trying to be as wrong as he consistently is...



The fact bothe Toronto and Boston think they have the key to winning the Cup through diametrically opposite means shows that we're finally getting a CBA that gives realistic hope to *every* team, not just the ones who can afford to pay the big bucks to the big players. Much different than just desperate hope for a fluke run.

Except those sens guys! The only way those guys can go is down.

 

[bert]

As ignorant and obnoxious as SSF sounds he is right, sure detroit won cups but they traded and drafted for the large majority of its team. Yzerman, Lidstrom, Federov, Holmstrom, Fischer, McCarthy, Draper, Maltby just to name a few. Teams payroles escilate as they win its a fact. With the new CBA teams that develop their own talent and win wont be able to hang on to there players.

No CBA is perfect but under the old CBA a team like Tampa can be a dynasty with all home grown talent but under the new cba they cant. They will have to let go of players because of the success.

IMHO Tampa, Ottawa and Philadelphia are going to be the top teams coming out of the lockout. Pretty much all the other power house's before the lockout have to break up significant parts of its team or are going to have players retire or be innefective due to age.

 

[AM]

as has been pointed out

As ignorant and obnoxious as SSF sounds he is right, sure detroit won cups but they traded and drafted for the large majority of its team. Yzerman, Lidstrom, Federov, Holmstrom, Fischer, McCarthy, Draper, Maltby just to name a few. Teams payroles escilate as they win its a fact. With the new CBA teams that develop their own talent and win wont be able to hang on to there players.

No CBA is perfect but under the old CBA a team like Tampa can be a dynasty with all home grown talent but under the new cba they cant. They will have to let go of players because of the success.

IMHO Tampa, Ottawa and Philadelphia are going to be the top teams coming out of the lockout. Pretty much all the other power house's before the lockout have to break up significant parts of its team or are going to have players retire or be innefective due to age.

a million times before, the old CBA didnt allow teams to keep their players either.

Its only if you wanted to lose money every year that you could "keep your players".

Alarm clock ringing! The Sens went bankrupt! The NHL was on the verge of insolvency!

Anything getting in there yet?

 

[Cawz]

Please elaborate because everything he says makes sense to me.

Everything he says? His latest tirade isnt as far off as most of what he posts, but if you agree with everything he says (ie in previous days), I dont know what to say.

Most of his posts say that the obsolete system was fair and worked. Considering the PA even admits to it not working, I'm not too sure how anyone can still hold on to the delusion that the old NHL worked.

It worked for a while for the Oilers, just like it was recently working for the Sens and TB. The Oil had arguably the top line in hockey, with Weight centering Guerin and Smyth, and were either #1 or #2 in their division.

But unfortunaly, that happened right in the middle of the salary escalations. If that was right now, and the players knew they werent going to be able to get raises beyond what the league could sustain, then maybe we'd see some irrational Oilers fans singing this same tune.

Conversly, what would have happened under the old system when Richards wants to be paid like a playoffs MVP and St. Louis wants to be paid like a leauge MVP? It would be tough to keep everyone under either system.

So ya, just because your team can tread water for a bit, doesnt change the fact that they were still part of a sinking ship called the NHL.

EDIT: And what he said above, too.

 

[norrisnick]

a million times before, the old CBA didnt allow teams to keep their players either.

Its only if you wanted to lose money every year that you could "keep your players".

Alarm clock ringing! The Sens went bankrupt! The NHL was on the verge of insolvency!

Anything getting in there yet?

Ilitch recouped the losses in '97, '98, and '02. He's willing to gamble and so far it has paid off enough times to keep the ball rolling. I think this cap is coming at the perfect time for him because the Wings' core is primed to crumble as Fedorov (already has), Yzerman (likely already has sadly), Shanahan, Lidstrom are slowly ending their time in the winged wheel and the Grind Line ages. They lost big in '03 and '04 and their odds of winning in the future are getting dimmer and dimmer. Had he and Holland continued to ice big money teams odds are he would have gotten too deep in the hole to climb out of with one Cup. (not that he'd ever get into serious financial trouble but that he wouldn't be making up for weaker seasons with deep playoff runs anymore).

 

[Cawz]

sure detroit won cups but they traded and drafted for the large majority of its team. Yzerman, Lidstrom, Federov, Holmstrom, Fischer, McCarthy, Draper, Maltby just to name a few.

But what did they give up for Hull, Lucky Luc, Hasek, Cujo, Lang, Hatcher... who am I missing?

Every one of them all-stars, and they didnt give up very much to get em. Please note this isnt a hack on the Wings. They were within their rights to do it, but as far as buying a team (which no team has literally done), the Wings one of the teams that this desribes best.

 

[Bruwinz37]

Everyone is going to build a Stanley Cup champion out of the new CBA and its cap.

Boston says they are in the best position.
http://bruins.bostonherald.com/bruins/view.bg?articleid=91082

Steve Simmons from the Toronto Sun has been quoted blabbing about how all of this is an opportunity for the Leafs to dump a lot of salary, and build a real contender.

Now between the Bruins saying they can build a contender by buying castoffs (like those from the Mapleleafs), and the Leafs saying they will be able to build a contender by casting off dead weight (who the Bruins intend to use to build a contender) and pursue other castoffs from other teams, aren't we being a little optimistic here?

I don't see any teams being instantly catapulted into the Cup finals here as a consequence of buying a cup (wait a minute, isn't that how we got into all of this trouble?). I believe, it will still take good management and scouting, and a real desire on the part of the entire organization to win the cup. I don't really see this as a quick fix for incompetent managers.

Boy that is a lot of twisted interpretation on your behalf. The premise of the Herald article was that the Bruins are in a good position to add a lot of quality players due to other team's precarious financial situations. There is not only castoffs, but they are simply in addition to the 200+ FAs still out there. Its a buyers market. For teams like Toronto and Detroit it is also a way to get rid of some dead weight from the old CBA mantra of "Spend too much on old guys".

 

[bert]

What part of "no CBA is perfect" didnt you understand?

You are right I used my words way to losely, I agreed with what he posted in his original post in this thread not the rest of the stuff.

Not every team ihas to have a 60 million dollar payrole to wing. The Lightning would have hovered around 45 and they would have been able to afford it because they were winning.

Detroit signed Joseph (after hasek retired) they signed Robitaille for next to nothing they signed Hatcher along with Whitney with the money they lost on Federov leaving for Anaheim. Hull was the only UFA signing but they had lots of money left over due to WINNING. They lost Lapointe and Devereux as UFA's. Does that even it out for you?

They traded Slava Kozlov (a player they drafted and developed) among other things for Hasek. They also traded for Lang.

They never won a cup with Hatcher, Whitney, Lang or Joseph thus proving the theory of attempting to buy your team doesnt work.

Ok I guess I will list Detroits core. Larionov, Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Yzerman, Lidstrom, Federov, Holmstrom, Fischer, McCarthy, Draper, Maltby, Hasek, Shanahan, Legacy, Dandenault. That is fifteen players what are your thoughts?

 

[Boltsfan2029]

No CBA is perfect but under the old CBA a team like Tampa can be a dynasty with all home grown talent but under the new cba they cant. They will have to let go of players because of the success.

Sorry, but there's no way we could have kept all that home grown talent under the old CBA. We have one of those "responsible" owners who won't allow us to continue to lose massive amounts of money. Considering we had to get to the Cup finals and have two 7-game series to turn a profit, there's no way we could have held onto all our players indefinitely as it's highly unlikely we could have repeated that scenario every year.

Over the last two "years" (seasons played), we've let Prospal (free agency) and Stillman (walked away from arbitration award) go (although we got Prospal back via trade). We've also let Nolan Pratt go once (re-signed at a lower salary), Stan Neckar twice (brought back via trade after the first time & then let go again) and Ben Clymer once (no qualifying offer), all due to $$ considerations. So far we've managed to only potentially lose one "major" player (assuming Stillman goes elsewhere), but it would have been inevitable under the old CBA that sooner or later, some of the bigger names were going to be impossible to keep. We simply don't have an unlimited budget.

Same could eventually hold true under a capped system, but those who think it wouldn't have happened without a cap are mistaken, at least as far as some teams go.

 

[SuperDave21]

I love all the talk about who's going to win the Stanley Cup instead of the CBA, it's refreshing

Now all I keep hearing is that Boston and Toronto are the biggest contenders for the cup this year and I can't help but laugh. Really? You think Toronto is going to keep all their stars under the new CBA? If they keep 4 stars and the rest of the team I'd be surprised. I think the biggest contender for the cup this year has to be the Coyotes. Why you ask? I want you all to go look up who the Coyotes signed in the off season before the lockout, actually I'll just post it to save time:

Brett Hull
Boyd Devereaux
Sean O'Donnell
Mike Ricci
Oleg Saprykin
Petr Nedved
Denis Gauthier

And not to mention players like Shane Doan, Tyson Nash, Mike Johnson, Derek Morris, David Tanabe, Ladislav Nagy, and Mike Comrie are also back and healthy and tearing up the leagues over seas. And the best part is...they're all signed and UNDER the new cap. If you want to talk about a contender for this year I don't think you have to look any further.

 

[Cawz]

What part of "no CBA is perfect" didnt you understand?

What are you talking about? I said the exact same words (maybe that was in another thread - I've been very dilligent at avoiding work today). The dude youre defending has said many times that the old CBA was fine and worked. Oh, but I guess you addressed that below. Never mind.

You are right I used my words way to losely, I agreed with what he posted in his original post in this thread not the rest of the stuff

Not every team ihas to have a 60 million dollar payrole to wing. The Lightning would have hovered around 45 and they would have been able to afford it because they were winning.

How come I dont see TB fans *****ing like some Sens fans? I cant recall any TB fans as bad as some of the delusional Sens fans (not you necessarily)

thus proving the theory of attempting to buy your team doesnt work.

But buying your team does cause a ripple effect throughout the league, causing other teams to attempt to spend to catch up, thus causing the league to be in poor financial shape. Thus the cost certainty thing blah blah blah...

No CBA is perfect, but the last one was very detrimental to the overall health of the league. Theres no such thing as "fair", but "level playing field" is about as close as you can get.

 

[abracanada]

Boy that is a lot of twisted interpretation on your behalf. The premise of the Herald article was that the Bruins are in a good position to add a lot of quality players due to other team's precarious financial situations. There is not only castoffs, but they are simply in addition to the 200+ FAs still out there. Its a buyers market. For teams like Toronto and Detroit it is also a way to get rid of some dead weight from the old CBA mantra of "Spend too much on old guys".

The premise is, you don't necessarily build a contender, by adding talent, alone. What I was trying to demonstrate, was that even though you have one of the biggest spending teams in the league, it believes this new CBA will give them the opportunity to stock up on talent and win the cup, and one of the stingiest teams in the league (your Bruins), believes they are in a position to stock up on talent and win the cup.

It pretty well ignores countless other possibilities, and indicates they are oblivious to 28 other teams. They are oblivious to the fact that players from these other teams, may actually like where they are. They are oblivious to the concept of team chemistry. They are oblivious to the role of the atmosphere in a winning organization. It is easy to come up with money and offer to bring players in, it is much tougher to build a cohesive team capable of winning a Stanley Cup.

P.S. I know these are just journalists, but it also demonstrates that their mind set hasn't changed a lick when it comes to their teams. The T.O. journalist wants the Leafs to spend their way to the Cup, and the Boston journalist, believes they will be able to do it on the cheap now. The more you change, the more you stay the same I guess.

 

[bert]

I pretty much agree with everything you have said, especially the ripple effect. I dont know Tampa's financial state but I do know Ottawa's. If Ottawa makes it to the third round every year they can afford a 43 million dollar payrole, Tampa is a small market just like Ottawa. They dont pay as much taxes but dont have the same kindof revenues from attendance and concessions as Ottawa does. I figured Tampa could afford around a 45 million dollar payrole just like Ottawa. My mistake I guess. I just like the idea of being able to hang on to your home grown talent, I know you will not have one with the other (keeping home grown talent and ridiculous contracts offered to mediocore players) I just wish their was a system that worked.

 

[Bruwinz37]

The premise is, you don't necessarily build a contender, by adding talent, alone. What I was trying to demonstrate, was that even though you have one of the biggest spending teams in the league, it believes this new CBA will give them the opportunity to stock up on talent and win the cup, and one of the stingiest teams in the league (your Bruins), believes they are in a position to stock up on talent and win the cup.

Well to say the Bruins are one of the most stingy teams in the league says you really arent prepared to disuss this in an informed manner. Now if you want to discusss *how* they spend their money I am with you. The article was trying to demonstrate the some teams, like the Bruins, are going to have their choice to build a roster they want. Not just adding talent like a fantasy draft, but having the flexibility to build it the right way from the start.

It pretty well ignores countless other possibilities, and indicates they are oblivious to 28 other teams. They are oblivious to the fact that players from these other teams, may actually like where they are. They are oblivious to the concept of team chemistry. They are oblivious to the role of the atmosphere in a winning organization. It is easy to come up with money and offer to bring players in, it is much tougher to build a cohesive team capable of winning a Stanley Cup.

Dude, there are 250+ UFAs, team chemistry is something that is built during the year. Again, you are missing the point of the articles. A couple years ago did you look at a team like Minny or Anaheim and say, wow, what a cohesive unit, no. It is developed during the year. The point of the article is that because we are playing under a whole new system a team like the Bruins are starting from scratch, albeit with a solid core to build their UFAs around.

P.S. I know these are just journalists, but it also demonstrates that their mind set hasn't changed a lick when it comes to their teams. The T.O. journalist wants the Leafs to spend their way to the Cup, and the Boston journalist, believes they will be able to do it on the cheap now. The more you change, the more you stay the same I guess

Sorry, but again, you arent getting it. Boston is not and has never been cheap. They may spend in an inefficient way but how much they spend is never an issue. The Boston article is only looking at the position the Bruins are in relation to the new cba. They have flexibility which is key with ANY CBA.

 

[abracanada]

The Bruins do have a reputation for being tight fisted. Sorry, but that is simply true. I understand you dont see it that way, but that is not simply something I made up to antagonize you.

Second, the Bruins do not have the atmosphere of a winning team. (I understand you may not agree) but the air they have, is that they are not willing to do anything to win. That is the atmosphere that may encourage some players to sign for less with teams they have either played for, or hoped to play for. I suspect a lot of these high end, older players, are going to play for less money, but if they do, it will be on teams they believe will help them win a ring. The Bruins management, does not instill that kind of confidence.

Third, I grant you, some teams can gell very quickly in terms of chemistry, but it is the exception rather than the rule. And quite often, it does happen after a thorough house cleaning of not only players, but coaches and management too. And you are also overlooking the fact that some of these older players, are going to be a little pissy about the money they may be playing for. If they have been spoiled for a long time, the novelty of getting back on the ice, may wear thin quite quickly. Especially if they know they have socked away enough money to retire comfortably for the rest of their lives and they begin to question if it is worth playing for this lowered salary or not.

As far as the Bruin article, I think it speaks for itself. The writer is gleeful about how cheap all these players are going to come. I am sure that will make the players real happy.

 

[Boltsfan2029]

Tampa is a small market just like Ottawa. They dont pay as much taxes

Depends upon the type of taxes. In a recent battle with the city/county over property taxes, it was stated that we pay more in property taxes than all the other NHL clubs combined. That's pretty staggering, especially when you consider the Bucs and the Yankees (spring training & minor league facilities) pay $0 in property taxes.

but dont have the same kindof revenues from attendance and concessions as Ottawa does.

We're just about dead even on attendance figures (we were 12th last year, Ottawa was 13th, with only an average of 62 per game difference). Our ticket prices are notoriously reasonable, so I'm not sure what the revenue from attendance would be and I have absolutely no clue about the concessions, but I do see lots of folks eating & drinking at the games!

I figured Tampa could afford around a 45 million dollar payrole just like Ottawa. My mistake I guess.

We can afford a $45M payroll, and were budgeted for that for 2004-2005. That year wasn't the problem, it was further down the road, as soon as 2005-2006. Had there been no lockout, that $45M would have included St. Louis' new contract and was the option year on Khabibulin. Therefore, in 2005-2006 we would have had to sign at least Lecavalier & Khabibulin. Richards would have been up for renewal the following year. In that 2-year span we would have also had to sign Modin, Boyle, Kubina, Sarich, Fedotenko and just about everyone else on the roster except Prospal, who I think would have had another year to go. The budget wouldn't have been a problem short term, but long term it could have gotten pretty sticky.

I just wish their was a system that worked.

You're certainly not alone there. Let's hope the new CBA will get us moving in the right direction.

 

[Icey]

And what do you call it that Detroit did to win their last cup? They bought many of those players.

how much does chemistry cost?

You can put the "top" players on a team, but if there is no chemistry it doesn't mean anything. There are plenty of examples of teams on paper that should win the Stanley Cup, but on the ice they weren't even close. Why? No chemistry.

 

[Bruwinz37]

The Bruins do have a reputation for being tight fisted. Sorry, but that is simply true. I understand you dont see it that way, but that is not simply something I made up to antagonize you.

They have that reputation amongst the types of people who dont care to think about what the real problem is. A simple perusal of the salaries tell you that *how much* they spend is not an issue. You can believe whatever you like. Fwiw, I dont think you are antagonizing me on purpose, I just dont think you are as well informed as you presume you are.

Second, the Bruins do not have the atmosphere of a winning team. (I understand you may not agree) but the air they have, is that they are not willing to do anything to win. That is the atmosphere that may encourage some players to sign for less with teams they have either played for, or hoped to play for. I suspect a lot of these high end, older players, are going to play for less money, but if they do, it will be on teams they believe will help them win a ring. The Bruins management, does not instill that kind of confidence.

Well, two 100+ point seasons in the past three isnt that bad. I grant you playoff success has been a major problem for them, but many teams went a long time without the same success. Will they do *anything* to win..no, they wont go in the red to do so and I dont hold that against them, but again, how much they spend is not an issue. They certainly made probably the biggest splash at the trade deadline last year, no?

Third, I grant you, some teams can gell very quickly in terms of chemistry, but it is the exception rather than the rule. And quite often, it does happen after a thorough house cleaning of not only players, but coaches and management too. And you are also overlooking the fact that some of these older players, are going to be a little pissy about the money they may be playing for. If they have been spoiled for a long time, the novelty of getting back on the ice, may wear thin quite quickly. Especially if they know they have socked away enough money to retire comfortably for the rest of their lives and they begin to question if it is worth playing for this lowered salary or not.

I am not overlooking anything. There will be plenty of money going around and not many guys are going to retire after sitting out a year.

As far as the Bruin article, I think it speaks for itself. The writer is gleeful about how cheap all these players are going to come. I am sure that will make the players real happy.

Again, you dont understand the article. The writer is trying to get the point across that the Bruins are in an excellent position to take advantage of so many players being available.

 

[kdb209]

The Bruins do have a reputation for being tight fisted. Sorry, but that is simply true. I understand you dont see it that way, but that is not simply something I made up to antagonize you.

They have that reputation amongst the types of people who dont care to think about what the real problem is. A simple perusal of the salaries tell you that *how much* they spend is not an issue. You can believe whatever you like. Fwiw, I dont think you are antagonizing me on purpose, I just dont think you are as well informed as you presume you are.

OK - a simple perusal of the salaries.

Well for the past 10 years the Bruins payroll rank has been: #22, #12, #12, #20, #22, #21, #18, #11, #18, and #12. For a team in that large a market, tight fisted seems pretty spot on.

 

[abracanada]

They have that reputation amongst the types of people who dont care"

They have a reputation amongst many people, and most of them do care.


Will they do *anything* to win..no, they wont go in the red to do so and I dont hold that against them, but again, how much they spend is not an issue.

In Boston, hockey is a business first, and a passion second. It is not about how much they spend, it is about how committed they are to winning. Not always, but there are times when you bite the bullet and put sport ahead of business. In the long run, when done expeditiously and with forethought, it can reap great benefits. When you truly have the team that can go all the way, it is good business to spend a little extra to ensure it. It is foolish to spend when you have nothing to build on. It is an age old tradition in hockey to bring in players to help towards the end of a season, and it has worked.


I am not overlooking anything. There will be plenty of money going around and not many guys are going to retire after sitting out a year.

Not true......there will not be plenty of money going around. There will be a lot less money than people are used to.


Again, you dont understand the article. The writer is trying to get the point across that the Bruins are in an excellent position to take advantage of so many players being available.

And the operative word being take advantage. If that is the mind set of management, good luck building a strong team.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

I love all the talk about who's going to win the Stanley Cup instead of the CBA, it's refreshing

Now all I keep hearing is that Boston and Toronto are the biggest contenders for the cup this year and I can't help but laugh. Really? You think Toronto is going to keep all their stars under the new CBA? If they keep 4 stars and the rest of the team I'd be surprised. I think the biggest contender for the cup this year has to be the Coyotes. Why you ask? I want you all to go look up who the Coyotes signed in the off season before the lockout, actually I'll just post it to save time:

Brett Hull
Boyd Devereaux
Sean O'Donnell
Mike Ricci
Oleg Saprykin
Petr Nedved
Denis Gauthier

And not to mention players like Shane Doan, Tyson Nash, Mike Johnson, Derek Morris, David Tanabe, Ladislav Nagy, and Mike Comrie are also back and healthy and tearing up the leagues over seas. And the best part is...they're all signed and UNDER the new cap. If you want to talk about a contender for this year I don't think you have to look any further.

I see you neglected to mention a goalie .... wonder why that is .....

 

[SuperDave21]

I see you neglected to mention a goalie .... wonder why that is .....

LOL! Ya that's been our one huge problem go figure But Boucher went on a 5 game shut out streak last season if anyone can remember that, plus we have a 2 great young goal tenders in Johnston and a kid named David Leneveau (spelling?). I saw him practice against these guys and boy was he something else, stopped everything from every where. I'd watch for him to be coming up soon with all of his talent.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

Originally Posted by bert
sure detroit won cups but they traded and drafted for the large majority of its team. Yzerman, Lidstrom, Federov, Holmstrom, Fischer, McCarthy, Draper, Maltby just to name a few.

But what did they give up for Hull, Lucky Luc, Hasek, Cujo, Lang, Hatcher... who am I missing?

Every one of them all-stars, and they didnt give up very much to get em. Please note this isnt a hack on the Wings. They were within their rights to do it, but as far as buying a team (which no team has literally done), the Wings one of the teams that this desribes best.

The Wings won a cup with Cujo, Lang and Hatcher? Damn i can't believe i missed that.

Yeah the Wings bought Hasek, it only cost them Osgood and Kozlov. They bought Luc, only to replace Lapointe who left to Boston, and they waited to till just before training camp to sign Hull cause no one else wanted him. People dont remember they also lost Lariniov to UFA, but after busting out in Florida he got traded back to Detroit. Yeah Detroit had a huge payroll, mostly due to re-sign their own players and replacing their own players lost to free agency.

 

[Cawz]

The Wings won a cup with Cujo, Lang and Hatcher? Damn i can't believe i missed that.

Yeah the Wings bought Hasek, it only cost them Osgood and Kozlov. They bought Luc, only to replace Lapointe who left to Boston, and they waited to till just before training camp to sign Hull cause no one else wanted him. People dont remember they also lost Lariniov to UFA, but after busting out in Florida he got traded back to Detroit. Yeah Detroit had a huge payroll, mostly due to re-sign their own players and replacing their own players lost to free agency.

I wasnt saying they bought a cup (even though it may seem so). But if you made a list of the players they aquired and the players they gave up, they didnt have to give up a lot to get all-stars/hall of famers. As I said, they were totally within their right to do it, so I wasnt slamming the Wings.

Go Pistons. There, you happy? Win or Lose, have fun in your town tonight.