Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

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

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    Yawn...I look forward to seeing Bourque tare it up on the 3rd line again and Bart patrolling the backend next season, at least for the first 20ish games....:(

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to MeanE's comment:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

     

    "The problem" is that under the new CBA, you cannot bury a guy in the minors, so if he is signed on a one-way deal for NHL money (even close to the minimum like this), the money counts against the cap - all but $90K.  He doesn't count as a roster spot in Boston if he's in Providence, but the team can only have 50 players under contract at any level.

    There's no guarantee he gets plucked off of waivers.  Bourque didn't.

     



    Book - do you have a link to the new CBA?


     



    I don't think it exists yet, as a full formal document.  But I went looking for a source, and I missed a zero.  According to what CapGeek calls the "Wade Redden Rule", a player buried in the minors costs:  Cap Hit - (league minimum+$375K=$900,000).  So Redden would have cost $5.6M to the Rangers Cap instead of the full $6.5.

    Bartkowski will cost nothing against the cap next year even if he's in Providence.  Just Jacobsbucks.

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

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    Book, let's not kid ourselves. He is signed to a one way contract with the expectation that he be on the B's roster next season. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    Why do you say that?  It means he is at best filling the role Aaron Johnson has now.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    Why do you say that?  It means he is at best filling the role Aaron Johnson has now.




    Exactly...it is expected that he will be on the roster as AJ currently is. Otherwise there would be no point to giving him a one-way contract. None.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from asmaha. Show asmaha's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    McQuaid out for a long stretch. Perhaps they simply see hm as best available at the moment. Ugh.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to asmaha's comment:

    McQuaid out for a long stretch. Perhaps they simply see hm as best available at the moment. Ugh.




    That is a very disturbing thought....

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

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to jmwalters' comment:

    In response to asmaha's comment:

     

    McQuaid out for a long stretch. Perhaps they simply see hm as best available at the moment. Ugh.

     




    That is a very disturbing thought....

     



    No kidding. Gives me the heebie jeebies.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to asmaha's comment:

     

     

    No kidding. Gives me the heebie jeebies.

     



    I was going to go for "the creeps" myself but heebie jeebies would work....:)

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

    Maybe he will be 2013-14's Macdermid? Isn't Bourque's a one-way next season too?


    Yes to the Bourque question JM.

    And the biggest reason he didn't get claimed.

    Maybe second biggest with ability being the first.



    I actually thought Chris would get claimed by an organization that needed help on their AHL. Bourque is really good on the powerplay in Providence.

    JM- I think the exact opposite for Bart "Shutdown" Bartkowski, I think Feaster wants to make sure Calgary has him for a year at least. two games this season isn't enough for PC to say he wants him for next year.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

    Maybe he will be 2013-14's Macdermid? Isn't Bourque's a one-way next season too?


    Yes to the Bourque question JM.

     

    And the biggest reason he didn't get claimed.

    Maybe second biggest with ability being the first.



    I actually thought Chris would get claimed by an organization that needed help on their AHL. Bourque is really good on the powerplay in Providence.

     

    JM- I think the exact opposite for Bart "Shutdown" Bartkowski, I think Feaster wants to make sure Calgary has him for a year at least. two games this season isn't enough for PC to say he wants him for next year.




    I'm thinking the same thing, but to hear CJ talk about him, sounds like he likes his game.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

     

    JM- I think the exact opposite for Bart "Shutdown" Bartkowski, I think Feaster wants to make sure Calgary has him for a year at least. two games this season isn't enough for PC to say he wants him for next year.



    Interesting take on this. I guess we will find out soon enough what is up with this bizarre development. But, wouldn't Feaster prefer a two-way contract? Why the one-way? It's not like he has earned one somehow.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    It does seem to suggest someone somewhere thinks he belongs in the NHL.  Just seems odd, plus odd timing.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to jmwalters' comment:

    JM- I think the exact opposite for Bart "Shutdown" Bartkowski, I think Feaster wants to make sure Calgary has him for a year at least. two games this season isn't enough for PC to say he wants him for next year.

    Interesting take on this. I guess we will find out soon enough what is up with this bizarre development. But, wouldn't Feaster prefer a two-way contract? Why the one-way? It's not like he has earned one somehow.



    You can still send a player down but he gets paid the same. There is always a possibility that Chiarelli and Feaster have agreed on what is to sent Calgary's way for Boumeester but not Iginla. Hey If it's Cammalleri and Boumeester i'm fine with that.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    You can still send a player down but he gets paid the same. There is always a possibility that Chiarelli and Feaster have agreed on what is to sent Calgary's way for Boumeester but not Iginla. Hey If it's Cammalleri and Boumeester i'm fine with that.

     

     



    Man, if you are even remotely right this could be a very exciting deadline.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    In response to jmwalters' comment:

    JM- I think the exact opposite for Bart "Shutdown" Bartkowski, I think Feaster wants to make sure Calgary has him for a year at least. two games this season isn't enough for PC to say he wants him for next year.

     

    Interesting take on this. I guess we will find out soon enough what is up with this bizarre development. But, wouldn't Feaster prefer a two-way contract? Why the one-way? It's not like he has earned one somehow.



    You can still send a player down but he gets paid the same. There is always a possibility that Chiarelli and Feaster have agreed on what is to sent Calgary's way for Boumeester but not Iginla. Hey If it's Cammalleri and Boumeester i'm fine with that.

     

     




    Cammalleri and Boumeester. Yes and Yes.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to kelvana33's comment:



    Cammalleri and Boumeester. Yes and Yes.



    Get it done with one team and be done with it.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    In response to kelvana33's comment:



    Cammalleri and Boumeester. Yes and Yes.



    Get it done with one team and be done with it.




    Of course, it would create a cap nightmare for next season. But if it results in a cup, I care not.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

     


    I don't think it exists yet, as a full formal document.  But I went looking for a source, and I missed a zero.  According to what CapGeek calls the "Wade Redden Rule", a player buried in the minors costs:  Cap Hit - (league minimum+$375K=$900,000).  So Redden would have cost $5.6M to the Rangers Cap instead of the full $6.5.

     

    Bartkowski will cost nothing against the cap next year even if he's in Providence.  Just Jacobsbucks.



    Thanks for sharing what you found.

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

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    For all that are complaining about a 1-way deal.  Did you ever think that maybe PC did not want to give him a multi-year contract, so instead he compromised with his agent and gave him "NHL" money for one year to keep his options open.  If he makes the team as a 7th, PC has him locked in at a price and I believe he would still be an RFA at the end of the contract, and who cares what he makes in the A.  Good for Matt to earn $650K instead of $60K, it's not my money.  You pay a lot more for 1-ways when they are in the minors, but you save money when they are in the show.  It's a good move, since one has a cap and one doesn't.  Krug gets $1.7 million with the Bruins.  Sounds great, but if he isn't head and shoulders above Bartkowski, who gets the call?  What about next year when the Bruins and everyone else will be up against the cap, they might not be able to absorb $1.7 million into their lineup, but could absord $650!  For those that say, In Peter We Trust.  This might be one of those times!

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    Bartkowski will not be in a Bruins uniform next season, niether Boston nor Providence.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    Bartkowski will not be in a Bruins uniform next season, niether Boston nor Providence.

     



    I hope you're right.  Not that I don't like him, but if he gets the Bruins a piece they need, I am all for it.  He is not high on my list of prospects, a JAG in my book.  Either way, IMO his contract is a good one for the Bruins or any other team for the reasons I stated.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Bruins sign Bartkowski to a one-year, one-way contract extension through 2013-14

    Finally up: he'll be earning $650,000.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share