ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

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

    ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins


    http://www.telegram.com/article/20090621/COLUMN36/906210463/1009/SPORTS

    That’s good news for the bean counters on Causeway Street and for owner Jeremy Jacobs’ bottom line at Delaware North, but not for Bruins general manager Peter Chiarelli. Why? Because had Murray won his case, he would have gotten more money next year ($2.76 million in all), but according to The Boston Globe, it would have been off the salary-cap books.

    Now, the remaining $1.383 million due Murray will continue to count against the Bruins’ cap, as did the first installment last season.

    And, as all Bruins fans know, the team currently is right up against the $57.6 million cap ceiling, and that’s without re-signing free agents Phil Kessel and Matt Hunwick. Plus, the new cap might even be lowered later this summer.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ocram. Show ocram's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    That 1.3mil could be another D-man.  The B's should just pay the guy, it puts them at a competitive disadvantage.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from damngood. Show damngood's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    [QUOTE]That 1.3mil could be another D-man.  The B's should just pay the guy, it puts them at a competitive disadvantage.
    Posted by ocram[/QUOTE]

    Jacobs doesnt care, all his season tickets have been sold for  next season
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dkrejci46. Show dkrejci46's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    I've been trying not to insult people on this board but all three of you are idiots.
    First off the Bs aren't right up against the cap, they still have some room. The bonus cushion is back in for this season, meaning that Wheeler and Rask will ahve a combined hit of 1.6 million instead of 6 million.
    Secondly its not like the Bruins can just choose to pay him, its a matter for the players union, they decide. If the Bruins could just pay him they would have, it has nothing to do with Jacobs, nor does anything have to do with Jacobs in the salary cap era, he merely decides how over priced beer should be at the garden. He hired the GM, he hired a damn good GM, and the Bruins spend to the cap every year, so quit your complaining.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ninosurfer. Show ninosurfer's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    [QUOTE]I've been trying not to insult people on this board but all three of you are idiots. First off the Bs aren't right up against the cap, they still have some room. The bonus cushion is back in for this season, meaning that Wheeler and Rask will ahve a combined hit of 1.6 million instead of 6 million. Secondly its not like the Bruins can just choose to pay him, its a matter for the players union, they decide. If the Bruins could just pay him they would have, it has nothing to do with Jacobs, nor does anything have to do with Jacobs in the salary cap era, he merely decides how over priced beer should be at the garden. He hired the GM, he hired a damn good GM, and the Bruins spend to the cap every year, so quit your complaining.
    Posted by dkrejci46[/QUOTE]

    Someone just posted an article you annoying tool. Shut your face.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dkrejci46. Show dkrejci46's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    yes, they posted an article, and then started the jacobs bashing, read the thread before posting please
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Pretzeller. Show Pretzeller's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    [QUOTE]First off the Bs aren't right up against the cap, they still have some room. The bonus cushion is back in for this season, meaning that Wheeler and Rask will ahve a combined hit of 1.6 million instead of 6 million. Posted by dkrejci46[/QUOTE]

    Yeah I was just checking on nhlnumbers.com and it does report that the bruins are currently sitting at $50.485mil without taking into account Rask salary, but they still currently had Blake Wheelers cap hit at the $2.825mil, so I'm just wondering about the bonus cushion whether it actually is back in for this year because the cba does run through 2010-'11 and they didn't re-open cba talks this year and they do have the option to extend it to 2011-'12, so I'm thinking your right and if that's the case it'll lower the cap hit down from $50.845 giving the bruins a good chunk of change to fill out the roster about $7.5mil, I consider that pretty generous amount, considering the cap might still come down from the current $57.6mil, even with that much money might still be hard to keep Phil(would love to see him stay) and get all the guys signed and still have some money left over for the rfa's and ufa's next offseason
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ninosurfer. Show ninosurfer's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    [QUOTE]yes, they posted an article, and then started the jacobs bashing, read the thread before posting please
    Posted by dkrejci46[/QUOTE]

    Is Jacobs your uncle or something you dope? This is a public forum which means even arrogant twirps like you can make a fool out of yourself on a regular basis so give people the same courtesy
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ninosurfer. Show ninosurfer's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    Pretzeller, the bonus cushion is in effect this season.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celticsownthegarden. Show Celticsownthegarden's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    dkrejci46 is the self proclaimed know it all of this board, no one can stand him which works out perfect because of the ignore feature
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dkrejci46. Show dkrejci46's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    Those who refuse to be optimistic about what promises to be a very good hockey team because of a dislike with an owner who wronged the fan base in the pass (he is not doing so now) can ignore me all you want, any intelligent coherent comment about hockey or the cap would just fly right over their head anyhow....go watch  basketball guy
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ocram. Show ocram's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    Krejci,

    full disclosure i have not fully read the CBA but,

    bonus cushion or not, they could still use the 1.3 mil.

    they paid schaffer to play in providence, they could have done the same thing for Murray to stay home.

    why would the NHLPA say no to paying the guy in full?  that doesnt make any sense.

    Im not hating on the Bruins, just pointing out something that could put them in a competitive disadvantage. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celticsownthegarden. Show Celticsownthegarden's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    [QUOTE]Those who refuse to be optimistic about what promises to be a very good hockey team because of a dislike with an owner who wronged the fan base in the pass (he is not doing so now) can ignore me all you want, any intelligent coherent comment about hockey or the cap would just fly right over their head anyhow....go watch  basketball guy
    Posted by dkrejci46[/QUOTE]

    IT WAS ALL FROM THE ARTICLE!!!

    NO ONE BAD MOUTHED YOUR UNCLE

    MY GOD YOUR THICK, WHO DRESSES YOU IN THE MORNING? I BET YOU STILL WEAR VELCRO SHOES
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kclione. Show Kclione's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    Shame on anyone who thinks 'dkrejci46' is smart enough to tell the difference between someones comments on here and quotes from an article complete with a link to the article.

    'dkrejci46' is a loner & bruins fanatic with a disturbing infatuation for his uncle JJ just ignore the kid, he's just not that bright.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins


    The reason no one cares about threads like these, is because they are so predictable

    "JJ is the worst, sheep, ticket prices, blah blah"

    No one cares. Go push pins into your JJ voodoo dolls and cut yourself to see how much it bleeds.

    Emo fa*gs



    Krejci logs onto these forums because he actually has something to provide to people interested in the Bruins. On the other hand, you guys just come here and faceroll the keyboard and think people care what you think.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from GillesGilbert. Show GillesGilbert's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    My understanding is that Chiarelli has pretty much said that he will have to move somebody to make the numbers work for next year. I don't know how JJ feels about the Murray decision but it was certainly in the best interests of Bruin fans to have the Bruins lose that case and have 1.3million more cap room for this season. Having said that, there was no way that Chiarelli was counting on having that money to spend. I am very optimistic about the Bruins future. Let's just all try and be as polite as possible to others here.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from damngood. Show damngood's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    [QUOTE]The reason no one cares about threads like these, is because they are so predictable "JJ is the worst, sheep, ticket prices, blah blah" No one cares. Go push pins into your JJ voodoo dolls and cut yourself to see how much it bleeds.

    Emo fa*gs
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    Yet no one said anything about that in this thread, I know your need to protect your boyfriend dkrejci on here but your makin no sence.

    Also funny how you make fun of emo when you have the 13 year old girl favorite 'the killers'
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dkrejci46. Show dkrejci46's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    1. to all those who are questioning if the cushion is back or not, PC said it on WEEI in an interview on the mid day show.
    2.celticsownthegarden - go up and read the third post, clearly bashing jacobs for being thrifty, had nothing to do with the article. and I wear sperrys b*tch.
    3. Jacobs isn't my uncle, hes my second cousin twice removed.
    4.Kclione - ahhhh you're not even worth it.
    5. While the Killers new stuff is kinda suspect they have some solid albums, when the beatles were around they were favorites of 13 year old girls too, whats so wrong with that?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    Best Bands of my Generation

    1) The Killers
    very distant second is
    2) Dave Matthews Band
    3) U2
    I would mention Led Zeppelin, but although he is one of my personal favs, he wasn't my generation.
    I have massively overplayed DMB and u2 and Led Zepp, so I really don't listen to them any more.

    new bands? The killers are still king IMO, still relevant, still making great music.
    Day & age wasn't their best album obviously, but check out this full orchestra version of 'Dustland Fairytale' on letterman
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DgeXDFL1Ac&feature=channel_page

    best new bands:
    1) The killers
    2) The Arcade Fire
    3) Kings of Leon
    4) The National
    5) too many others to put here. The decemberists have some good stuff, TV on the radio, MGMT


    Beyonce :)






     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from cwoods7977. Show cwoods7977's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    I think everybody will be well served to just ignore the ambiguously ga y duo of dkrejci46 and Olsonic1 they obviously have some serious social issues and have become superfriends via BDC so lets just let them be.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from dkrejci46. Show dkrejci46's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    I think you would be well served to read what we have to say, as there are only a handful of people on these forums that don't just say "JACOBS S*CKS (they really won't let you say s*cks on this board), YOUR A SHEEP IF YOU LIKE THE BRUINS, SHEEP SHEEP SHEEP"


    and olsonic, none of those bands are even remotely close to being a top 20 new band. U2 is the only good band you mentioned and they aren't really "new"
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from joekool. Show joekool's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    since we've gotten off of the subject of hockey and moved on to music.  thrash, black, and experimental metal is where its at
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from cwoods7977. Show cwoods7977's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    Why dont you two passive feminists get a room
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    Joe, what is an example of experimental metal?

    just list some youtube stuff you like
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from HamiltonBulldog. Show HamiltonBulldog's posts

    Re: ARTICLE: Murray verdict could cost Bruins

    [QUOTE]Joe, what is an example of experimental metal? just list some youtube stuff you like
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    Why dont you have this conversation somewhere else? No wants wants to hear about your fruity musical preferences!
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share