Bruins Talk With Islanders

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : The problem with this logic is every NHL GM understood that TT was simply a career backup having a miracle season behind the league's best defense.  Anybody with a clue could see that Fernandez had the same numbers TT had before his back injury, and then Thomas wins a very tainted "Vezina" against 2 other nobodies.  For PC to overreact and pay him like he's Marty Brodeur was silly, shortsighted and shockingly naive, especially seeing how it was PC who was desperately trying to replace TT at every turn leading up to that season. TT fans or not, anyone who did not regard that insane $5M per contract for 4 YEARS for an aging flopper with the worst fundamentals in the NHL is simply clueless.
    Posted by SoxFanInIL


    Thomas didn't beat out 2 nobodies, he beat out every goalie who was elidgible for the award.. Also he is a career back up?  If your a bruins fan, like him or not you should know the history of bruins goal tending in the past 20 years and respect that he indeed solidified a very rocky and questionable position for the bruins..

    His contract dollars are very on par with many established starters in the league, its not fair to compare him in dollar amounts to younger less proven goalies, or true career back ups.


     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : I can't confirm, but people on my other board said that PC was on the radio talking about the timing of the deal and how getting TT signed before his birthday was avoiding the 35+ restrictions.  Again, I didn't hear it myself, but multiple people claimed to.
    Posted by Raskman


    I don't know that I believe that.. (not that you didnt hear it but someone else did) I find it hard to believe pc with all his advisors would miss this you know? I doubt any gm would ever admittingly state "we did this deal so we have the opportunity to buy the player out after x years at a low value"
    I mean the buy out of 3 mill cost less, but the fact is its still treated as buying out a 5m season on the cap you know?

    But that being said the speculation was generated from the timing of things, thomas was re-upped as the regular season, and many criticised the timing as you would think you would want your starting goalie focused on his play, and not dealing with contract negoitiations etc, and the point was made that maybe pc thought by signing thomas he would be able to avoid the plus 35 contract..
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Raskman. Show Raskman's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : Raskman... expand on this.  I remember the Globe reporting that part of the reason of the timing on that awful contract was to get him signed before his birthday, as it would affect dumping him easier down the road.  What are you saying?
    Posted by SoxFanInIL


    TT was signed before his 35th birthday, but the CBA does define a veteran player's age at the moment the contract is signed, it's the age the player will be on June 30th before their new contract goes into effect. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from biggskye. Show biggskye's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

       It always surprises me that people continue to argue about Tim Thomas, with Soxfan.
    All he does is patrol these boards, watching for someone to dare mention TT in a favourable way.
    He then gets to spew out the same old diatribe of nonsense that seems to be his sole reason for living.
    His rants are factless, baseless, nonsense, and he has been on my ignore list for awhile.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Raskman. Show Raskman's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    NAS - a good GM builds to win a stanley cup....the isles have no real need for anyone older than 26....and i'm done with this debate now because I'm sick of repeating myself
    Posted by pbergeron37


    I agree and disagree.  Yes, they shouldn't be looking for veterans because they just aren't to that point yet.  On the other hand they have very little star power and with the "Lighthouse Project" hanging in the balance it wouldn't shock me for them to bring in some names to help sell tickets.  Also, they need to get to the cap floor and some veteran give them that and they can just let them walk when their young players are up for renewal in a few years.  I'm not saying that they would trade away young talent though.  More like they might want to take contracts from cap strapped teams.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    NAS - a good GM builds to win a stanley cup....the isles have no real need for anyone older than 26....and i'm done with this debate now because I'm sick of repeating myself
    Posted by pbergeron37


    They also have to stay in business.  They can't go 5-78 for the next three years while hoping that they have the right formula.  They certainly aren't going to dump one of their top players for a draft pick, a 5/6 defenseman and a pile of garbage.

    Maybe you should have included Hamill.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    Pberg, the first round pick is still a bit of a crap shoot, and if next years draft isn't good, as projected it wont have a ton of value, I mean how much value has Hamill given the team?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    Pberg, the first round pick is still a bit of a crap shoot, and if next years draft isn't good, as projected it wont have a ton of value, I mean how much value has Hamill given the team?
    Posted by rolerhoky19


    While I agree with you 100%, there are indeed BAD GM's.  I dont know anything about the current GM of the Isles, but its extremely possible that he overvalues first round draft picks. 

    Some GM's were hired because they went into the interview with a passive personality, and just agreed with everything the interviewer said.  If the interviewer's ego is big enough, he'll hire the GM under the reasoning: "something about him struck me the right way".  Really, all that happened was the natural attraction of type A personalities (high ego) to type B personalities (overly agreeable/passive).  Type B people are generally less intelligent and generally less qualified and when they do get hired, they dont usually last.  DO you have any friends that cant hold onto a job, but can just get a new one at the drop of a hat?  Are these people generally "go with the flow" types with weaker personalities?  (if the answer to the first question is yes, the answer to the second question is probably yes as well).

    My point?  You are probably smarter than a handful of GM's in the league.  I've read enough of your posts to know that.  People make bad hires all the time and hockey owners/presidents are no exception.  Its very possible that the Isles GM overvalues draft picks even though you do not.  ITs very possible that you would be a better gm than the isles GM.  The problem?  Good luck proving it.

    I'm sure that some of our smarter posters with strong personalities have lost jobs to "yes men" who were not as qualified.

    Not every trade has been 100% fair at the time of trade (circumstances that change after the trade are irrelevant).  There have been lopsided trades that involve good GM's taking advantage of bad ones. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    If I was a GM, I would scout weaknesses of other GM's.  Some GM's overvalue size, overvalue youth, overvalue draft picks....blah , blah , blah....And you offer him the thing that he overvalues.

    If you were in a fantasy hockey league and offered Toews to a kid in chicago, you'll probably get more vlaue than you would if you offered him to a kid in Washington.  Same concept really, you scout your opponent's weakness.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    1st round picks in the post lockout world are of insane value
    Posted by pbergeron37


    We must have different definitions of the word "insane":

    I don't think Steve Eminger is an insane value:

    /> Capitals — Traded Steve Eminger, 2008 third round pick (#84-Jacob Deserres) to Flyers for 2008 first round pick (#27-John Carlson) on 2008-06-20

    I don't think Alex Tanguay is an insane value:

    /> Flames — Traded Alex Tanguay, 2008 fifth round pick (#138-Maxim Trunev) to Canadiens for 2008 first round pick (#25-Greg Nemisz), 2009 second round pick (#49-Stefan Elliott) on 2008-06-20

    I wouldn't consider Vesa Toskola and Mark Bell to be insane values:

    /> Sharks — Traded Vesa Toskala, Mark Bell to Maple Leafs for conditional first round pick (2007 #13-Lars Eller), 2007 second round pick (#44-Aaron Palushaj), 2009 fourth round pick (#98-Craig Smith) on 2007-06-22

    Is Shane O'Brien an insane value?

    /> Ducks — Traded Shane O'Brien, 2007 third round pick (#75-Luca Cunti) to Lightning for Gerald Coleman, 2007 first round pick (#16-Colton Gillies) on 2007-02-24

    Is Ladislav Nagy an insane value?

    /> Coyotes — Traded Ladislav Nagy to Stars for Mathias Tjarnqvist, 2007 first round pick (#21-Riley Nash) on 2007-02-12

    Craig Rivet isn't insane in my books:

    /> Canadiens — Traded Craig Rivet, 2008 fifth round pick (#146-Julien Demers) to Sharks for Josh Gorges, 2007 first round pick (#22-Max Pacioretty) on 2007-02-25

    Not many would assign the word "insane" to Korolyuk and Fahey!

    /> Sharks — Traded Jim Fahey, Alexander Korolyuk to Devils forVladimir Malakhov, conditional first round pick (2007 #26-David Perron) on 2006-10-01

    Pretty difficult to call two second round picks "insane":

    /> Capitals — Traded two 2005 second round picks (#47-Tom Fritsche) (#52-Chris Durand) to Avalanche for 2005 first round pick (#27-Joe Finley) on 2005-07-30

    Should I keep going?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    Thanks drew,
    I would disagree would sadly have to disagree, while i do consider myself to be very knowledgable about the game itself, there are way to many legalities involved on the GM side of things for me to suspect I would be any good at that side.. Numbers I can crunch, opionate myself on players I can do.. But the legalities would be a whole new learning curve.  Maybe when stanley lands a position he can bring the rest of us on as advisors..

    And your right on the value is in the eye of the beholder, I don't watch juniors, so i have no first hand opinoins, but the over all concensus of the class is it may be the worst ever, or atleast the worst since the '99 class..

    I would think that means outside the top few picks, its a crap shoot, and a late first round pick early second from this year (considere to be one of the best classes in history)  is probably more valuable then say number 20 would be next year.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : Disagree entirely. Look at our team.  We can compete in the present, and we have a stacked minor league system for the future. What else do you want? There is no GM that could have predicted that Rask would not need to be phased in.  The Thomas deal was supposed to be as follows: we get a Vezina award caliber goalie for yr 1 and yr 2, who plays 50% of the games in yr 3 (as we phase Rask in), and an overpaid backup in yr 4.  But its okay, for Thomas to be overpaid in yr 4 if the value of the contract is realized over its life.  This is actually a GM strategy.  If you think you are good you may sign a guy to a 4 yr deal, knowing that he will be overpaid in yr 4.  The point is to put you over the hump in yrs 1, 2, and 3.  Its not PC's fault that Rask has emerged.  As a GM , trying to move Thomas is just dealing with situations that change around him. Im not even going to go there on Savard, because we all know that none of us would be even thinking about trading him had he not been concussed and had we not gotten Seguin. You are blaming PC because circumstances, beyond his control have changed, and he is now trying to adjust to them.  He's not the best GM, but I dont at all think he's over his head.
    Posted by Drewski5



    A good GM is supposed have the foresight to recognize Rask's NHL abilities, and plan the teams future accordingly. There were many who felt he was outplaying TT and Fernandez in camp 2 years ago. The Savard situation isn't about his concussion, it's about the fact that there are too many centers on this team, and not enough spots. This roster is unbalanced, centers with nobody to play with on the wing. Don't worry though we're about to sign Campbell that should really help.

    Bottom line is you don't sign guys to big contracts, with NTC's so you can trade them asap. Even the biggest Kool-aid sipper would have to say that's incompetence.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : A good GM is supposed have the foresight to recognize Rask's NHL abilities, and plan the teams future accordingly. There were many who felt he was outplaying TT and Fernandez in camp 2 years ago. The Savard situation isn't about his concussion, it's about the fact that there are too many centers on this team, and not enough spots. This roster is unbalanced, centers with nobody to play with on the wing. Don't worry though we're about to sign Campbell that should really help. Bottom line is you don't sign guys to big contracts, with NTC's so you can trade them asap. Even the biggest Kool-aid sipper would have to say that's incompetence.
    Posted by JWensink



    The bruins did plan for rask future accordingly, to not rush him.. I assume your senior to me, so how many bruins goalies have you seen come through with 1 good season and then wash out the next, you wanted to bank the franchise on a kid who is still unproven and let your vezina winning goalie walka year after the team team posted its highest (though skewed) point total since the 70S? 

    Savard, similarly went down early and the team struggled to score let alone win, has been the teams leading scorer every year he has been here.. If krejci and Bergeron had stepped up when he went down and play went on like they didnt miss a beat savard wouldnt have been resigned at the time he was.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    It's great when people complain after the fact . At the time of Thomas' contract he won the Vezina . Fernandez was retiring , Rask was unproven and Thomas was becoming a UFA. They were going into the next year as one of the favourites to win the cup. Do you do that with a goalie who hasn't reached the NHL full time ?  Thomas could have signed with anyone (UFA) and the B's would have been left with an unproven goalie. Thomas held leverage in contact negotiations because of the above. Do you think he wouldn't have gotten a NTC with someone else ( being the Vezina trophy winner ) ? To say that a GM should recognize Rask's abilities when he is still eligible as a rookie is just a really dumb statement. He was playing in Providence . Who knows how he would handle playing in the NHL full time. It's amazing how the capologists with a high school diploma come out of the woodwork . Hindsight makes people look really smart. Maybe they should lend PC their crystal balls.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    It's great when people complain after the fact . At the time of Thomas' contract he won the Vezina . Fernandez was retiring , Rask was unproven and Thomas was becoming a UFA. They were going into the next year as one of the favourites to win the cup. Do you do that with a goalie who hasn't reached the NHL full time ?  Thomas could have signed with anyone (UFA) and the B's would have been left with an unproven goalie. Thomas held leverage in contact negotiations because of the above. Do you think he wouldn't have gotten a NTC with someone else ( being the Vezina trophy winner ) ? To say that a GM should recognize Rask's abilities when he is still eligible as a rookie is just a really dumb statement. He was playing in Providence . Who knows how he would handle playing in the NHL full time. It's amazing how the capologists with a high school diploma come out of the woodwork . Hindsight makes people look really smart. Maybe they should lend PC their crystal balls.
    Posted by Chowdahkid-


    Incredibly wonderful post.  I agree with every word.  Every time someone complains about Thomas' contract, they should be refered to this.  Truly spectacular.

    Also, can you imagine the outcry (from the same people) if the B's let Thomas walk?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    Chowd.. and Nas,
    Definitely agree, but the sad reality is people can no longer just be fans anymore in the cap error, PC making a good move by signing thomas to a cap friendly contract is now irrelevant a season later because the team is tight to the cap.. I for one, am not ready to hand the team over to rask with out a back up plan, and until that occurs thomas has value in my eyes.. If rask falters with out thomas here the team would be sunk, people through auld's name around, etc.. but the fact is Auld isnt going to start 55 games and win 30.. Thomas gets a lot more criticism then he should and I think most people should take a real look at his career numbers before taking the path to bash him, he stacks up pretty favorably to most in terms of career GAA and SVS%..

    I have never been a fan of him (simply from the biased point that he does not look the part of a goalie) but I can recognize what he has done and accomplished.  Since thomas has joined the team, goal tending has never been a weakness of the bruins..
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : Incredibly wonderful post.  I agree with every word.  Every time someone complains about Thomas' contract, they should be refered to this.  Truly spectacular. Also, can you imagine the outcry (from the same people) if the B's let Thomas walk?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    You , I and anybody with a brain knows this. It was just put into words what most of us know. Sad truth is there are posters who don't. You're right about if they would have  let Thomas walk. Damned if you do , damned if you don't.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : You , I and anybody with a brain knows this. It was just put into words what most of us know. Sad truth is there are posters who don't. You're right about if they would have  let Thomas walk. Damned if you do , damned if you don't.
    Posted by Chowdahkid-


    100% agree.  I think most of us saw the thomas contract and thought, well if that's what it took, that's what it took.

    While we all saw the risk involved, I think we were mindful that our options were:
    a) give Thomas 4 yrs and a no movement clause
    b) give Thomas 5 yrs
    c) lose Thomas.

    A is far better than options b and c.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : 100% agree.  I think most of us saw the thomas contract and thought, well if that's what it took, that's what it took. While we all saw the risk involved, I think we were mindful that our options were: a) give Thomas 4 yrs and a no movement clause b) give Thomas 5 yrs c) lose Thomas. A is far better than options b and c.
    Posted by Drewski5


    Yup , at the time ( Vezina ) do you let Thomas walk ? Best option was him at as low as the B's could sign him for. And as a Vezina trophy winner he would have gotten a NTC somewhere else if not in Boston IMO.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 13o5ToN. Show 13o5ToN's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    Ryder in Providence and Sturm on IR frees up enough cap space to give Wheeler 1.5-2.5 or whatever he gets in arbitration. No Thomas or Savard trades needed.

    Lucic Savard Horton
    Recchi Bergeron Seguin
    Caron Krejci Wheeler
    Paille Campbell Thornton
    Chara Seidenberg
    Boychuk Stuart
    Ference Hunwick
    Rask
    Thomas
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from anthonyalbani89. Show anthonyalbani89's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    I think the Isles would be crazy to go for this deal.  They take on a ton of salary for older players while giving up their best defensemen and a cornerpiece of their young talent?  It makes no sense for them.  Sounds crazy to me. Why does it tick people off so much that Ferrence is an environmentalist?  Why would you care...?  And, Hunwick would be the odd man out, not Ferrence.
    Posted by Fletcher1


    I doubt that, Ferrance will be hurt by game 2 of the season. Or may not return at all?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    Ferrance does not play for the bruins, Andrew Ference does. Sorry for the sarcasm, but I don't understand how 90% of people can't spell that name.
    Posted by pbergeron37


    Were you confused as to which Bruins player he was referring to?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    for someone cracking rico suave jokes, you should lighten up
    Posted by pbergeron37


    Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrico.


    Suave.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    for someone cracking rico suave jokes, you should lighten up
    Posted by pbergeron37


    Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrico.

    Farreancce.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders

    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders:
    In Response to Re: Bruins Talk With Islanders : Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrico. Suave.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    Isn't that BBs line?

     

Share