"How much is this guy worth if that guy's worth that much?!?!"

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

    "How much is this guy worth if that guy's worth that much?!?!"

    Holy frejoles, is there ever a lot of this going on right now.  And fair enough.  It's a question for the Bruins as they look at whether or not to extend Krejci, Boychuk, Paille, Campbell and Soderberg.  The one common element of the discussions - and not just here?  Nobody and a clue, lieutenant, not a f--king clue.


    The "market" for players is like a character out of Hunter S. Thompson.  One minute it's flying high, manic, hallucinatory and prone to violence, the next its drunk, depressive, totally passive.  Pity the fools who go to arbitration because the arbitrator is going to look around at the sheer randomness of the signings over the last 18 months and make a decision by throwing a dart.


    I suppose this is to be expected.  I mean, here are all of the unknowns you need to take into account when thinking about your team pay structure if you're the GM:



    • How is 50% of revenue vs. 57% going to affect what you can pay players?

    • Last year's cap was artificial - how good was the projection?

    • This year's cap projection was all over the place thanks to a fluctuating Canadian dollar; is that going to be the rule?

    • How much weight can you put on the achievements of a 48 game season when projecting a player over a full season?

    • What's the market going to be like for trades if teams are increasingly reliant on EL contracts to balance the books?

    • Is the kind of moves TBL made with Sam Gagner going to become a common strategy to free up cap space, and how do you capitalize on it?

    • What will be the impact of the TBL moves (and others) on the trade market for players like Gagner who might be had cheaply as part of a cap space plan?

    • How will these uncertainties be reflected in arbitration decisions?

    • How fast will the cap continue to rise?

    • What impact are the cap reclamation measures going to have on teams?

    • Is the "middle class" going to get squeezed to the point that good second and third line players can be had at bargain rates?

    • Now that there are no more "get out of jail free" card buyouts, how are teams going to deal with contract mistakes?  They can't bury contracts under the new CBA...


    It's the wild west for contracts right now.  For the first time in a few years, teams are able to spend with a bit of certainty re: the CBA.  This year's cap is, at least, the first under the new CBA that's actually based on revenues.  So we're seeing a lot of high numbers and only a few of the low numbers of players finding that the frenzy for their services isn't really coming together.


    Midas Whale just get out the crystal ball - it's just as likely to tell you the right things as any talking head.


     


     


     


    Are you not entertained?!?!

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

    Re:

    Yes, but there are a few things that are, in fact, knowable:

    1. The sun is hot

    2. Oleg smash!

    3. Sandog likes prospects

    4. Krecji and JB will get substantial raises

    And all of these things are regardless of everything you just listed.

     

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

    Re:

    5. JMW likes to say "that's a big IF's" a lot.

    6. Chiarelli has done a great job at the trade deadline every year because there wasn't much out there.

    7. There is no such thing as a "comparison contract" when thinking about upcoming UFAs.

    Etc., Etc., Etc.,...

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

    Re:

    jm - disagree with #4.  Raises, yes. Big raises...well, $1M is a big raise in real dollars, but when it's only 25% of the contract's value....

     

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

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

    Re:

    You know my thoughts on this Book:

    Krecji: stays with Bruins-6.5mill, tests the market 7-7.5mill

    JB: stays with Bruins-5mill, tests the market 5.5-6mill

    I guess "substantial" is a relative term so I agree with that.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from bim09. Show bim09's posts

    Re:

    If Rask, the last line of defense, got 7 million a year and he shrinks in the post season, the first line of offense that doesn't shrink in the playoffs should see at least as much.  Krejci will get more than 6.5.  I'd bet on it.

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

    Re:

    In response to bim09's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    If Rask, the last line of defense, got 7 million a year and he shrinks in the post season, the first line of offense that doesn't shrink in the playoffs should see at least as much.  Krejci will get more than 6.5.  I'd bet on it.


     


     


     


     


    What a useless comparison. What's next? Are you going to suggest that krejci deserves a huge raise because Kobe Bryant can slam dunk?


     


     





    [object HTMLDivElement]

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

    Re:

    He might.  I don't think jm's off the mark by much if at all on Krejci - I could see him re-signing for $7M with maybe a shorter term than Bergeron (to baffle the optics a bit).  He is, after all is said and done, their #1 centre despite all of our dancing around with 1A and 1B.  I don't think that's the number people are thinking about when the sky is falling on some of the recent threads.

    Boychuk I'd go the other direction.  I think he stays at $4.5M if they're willing to go that high for him.  I don't know if they will be, but then again, I'm the one who keeps saying Chiarelli will just trade him if that becomes a problem number (i.e. too much for a #4/#5 D behind Chara, Hamilton, Seidenberg, and flip-flopping with Krug depending on game situations).  I like the guy's game - especially the fact that he seems to be just about indestructible - but I think he's one of those guys where you think he'll leave a huge hole until you look up and realize he got moved 6 months ago and not much has changed.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

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

    Re:

    South Park Johnny Cochran would be all over this as his agent:


    Cochran
    I have one final thing I want you to consider. Peter, Cam...this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!


    Peter Chiarelli
    Damn it! ... He's using the Chewbacca tactic!


    Cochran
    Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this negotiation? Nothing. It has nothing to do with David Krejci! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm an agent negotiating a contract for an NHL hockey player, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in with Mr. Jacobs deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! It does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must sign David Krejci for $100M/8 years.


     


    Are you not entertained?!?!

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

    Re:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    South Park Johnny Cochrane would be all over this as his agent:

    If Chewbacca lived on the forest moon of Endor with the Ewoks, you MUST give my client $10M a year!

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!




    Krejci is going to get paid for sure but I can't imagine his agent bringing up Rask when trying to hammer out a deal.

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

    Re:

    Rask contract has zero relevance when it comes to David Krejci.




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

    Re:

    Not that I make it a habit of trying to interpret bim or anything, but I think the point is playoff performance, not so much comparing the goaltender to the first line C.  I took it as "Krejci has been huge in the playoffs in the past and should get paid for it."

    Bringing up Rask here is like saying "shuperman" five times in front of a mirror.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

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

    Re:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    Not that I make it a habit of trying to interpret bim or anything, but I think the point is playoff performance, not so much comparing the goaltender to the first line C.  I took it as "Krejci has been huge in the playoffs in the past and should get paid for it."

    Bringing up Rask here is like saying "shuperman" five times in front of a mirror.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!




    Yeah Book, I figured that was his point and still think it's absurd. Rask "shrinks in the playoffs" so Krejci should get paid is plain wrong.

    Rask-career regular season numbers-102W-60L-22 with 23 shutouts-SP-.928-GAA-2.11

    Rask-career playoff numbers-28W-19L with 5 shutouts-SP-.930-GAA-2.11

     

    If Krejci's agent brings up Rask "shrinking in the playoffs", during negotiations then PC is going to laugh while thinking, "man, I'm going to crush it in these negotiations. This guy doesn't even know how math works".

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

    Re:

    "I think he stays at $4.5M if they're willing to go that high for him. I don't know if they will be, but then again, I'm the one who keeps saying Chiarelli will just trade him if that becomes a problem number."

     

    I wish you the best Johnny!

    Get someone good for him PC!

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Lex44. Show Lex44's posts

    Re:

    In response to bim09's comment:

    If Rask, the last line of defense, got 7 million a year and he shrinks in the post season, the first line of offense that doesn't shrink in the playoffs should see at least as much.  Krejci will get more than 6.5.  I'd bet on it.



    I know Krejci has had a couple of great playoff performances but he coming off about as bad of a playoff performance a 1st line center could have. 12 games - 0 goals 4 assists with maybe a couple assists on empty netters. Rask would have to average a 5.0 goals against and a .800 save percentage to equal that ....

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

    Re:

    Hunter S Thompson was a libertarian.  He believed our society in the USA was unjust.  He was a staunch supporter of the 2nd amendment and he was a "Live free or die" person like the character from "Breaking Bad". He certainly would understand capitalism and he would not believe in the Cap system IMO.  The transition from him to the Bs is like my lame azz attempt to use E.O. Wilson's Consilience in Bs discussion.  Loving Spoonful, "Hot times summer in the city".  Boredom has reached the "danger zone" Book.  The real question is how is the Bs management any different from the organizers of gladiators in the Roman Forum.  Yikes.  JJ is a capitalist.  PC is a capitalist.  Millionaire players are capitalist.  Dem dare fools look like me.   BTW your scribes are always fun to read Book!  :)

     

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    Holy frejoles, is there ever a lot of this going on right now.  And fair enough.  It's a question for the Bruins as they look at whether or not to extend Krejci, Boychuk, Paille, Campbell and Soderberg.  The one common element of the discussions - and not just here?  Nobody and a clue, lieutenant, not a f--king clue.

     

    The "market" for players is like a character out of Hunter S. Thompson.  One minute it's flying high, manic, hallucinatory and prone to violence, the next its drunk, depressive, totally passive.  Pity the fools who go to arbitration because the arbitrator is going to look around at the sheer randomness of the signings over the last 18 months and make a decision by throwing a dart.

     

    I suppose this is to be expected.  I mean, here are all of the unknowns you need to take into account when thinking about your team pay structure if you're the GM:



      • How is 50% of revenue vs. 57% going to affect what you can pay players?

     

      • Last year's cap was artificial - how good was the projection?

     

      • This year's cap projection was all over the place thanks to a fluctuating Canadian dollar; is that going to be the rule?

     

      • How much weight can you put on the achievements of a 48 game season when projecting a player over a full season?

     

      • What's the market going to be like for trades if teams are increasingly reliant on EL contracts to balance the books?

     

      • Is the kind of moves TBL made with Sam Gagner going to become a common strategy to free up cap space, and how do you capitalize on it?

     

      • What will be the impact of the TBL moves (and others) on the trade market for players like Gagner who might be had cheaply as part of a cap space plan?

     

      • How will these uncertainties be reflected in arbitration decisions?

     

      • How fast will the cap continue to rise?

     

      • What impact are the cap reclamation measures going to have on teams?

     

      • Is the "middle class" going to get squeezed to the point that good second and third line players can be had at bargain rates?

     

      • Now that there are no more "get out of jail free" card buyouts, how are teams going to deal with contract mistakes?  They can't bury contracts under the new CBA...



    It's the wild west for contracts right now.  For the first time in a few years, teams are able to spend with a bit of certainty re: the CBA.  This year's cap is, at least, the first under the new CBA that's actually based on revenues.  So we're seeing a lot of high numbers and only a few of the low numbers of players finding that the frenzy for their services isn't really coming together.

     

    Midas Whale just get out the crystal ball - it's just as likely to tell you the right things as any talking head.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!




    [object HTMLDivElement]

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

    Re:

    To me..the impactful musing, is the "middle class".  I see storm clouds.

    Now that the owners have "profit certainty", obviously, the value of their investment has skyrocketed.

    While some league wide financial stability is good....the down side is that it's only really helping those teams that don't need any help.

    When things get tight, the middle class gets hit hardest.  Always.  The TV deal is in place.  Those dollars are accounted for.  Some economists are predicting an 85 cent Can to US dollar.  The game has already experienced several years of good growth.  Nothing keeps growing into infinity.  Sport appeals most to the working middle class, which is dealing with high personal debt, and increasing difficulty in affording the live experience.  I see some retraction in the not to distant future.  Nothing that will kill the sport, but if it happens, it could really change the competitive balance overnight.

    Generally speaking, the 2nd and 3rd liners are middle class, and they are most going to feel the brunt.  They are now.  EL contracts are a huge piece of the puzzle, and they'll get bigger.  Already, value trumps ability, and theres something kinda unfortunate about that.  It seems obvious that moving forward..lots of NHL caliber players will get bypassed, once their EL days expire, simply because of the neccesity of finding cheaper parts.  The game...any game needs it's starpower, and those guys will always have some leverage, but it now comes at the expense of their teamates, as opposed to a function of market economics.

    It seems obvious to me, that when business starts to soften up in the NHL's strongest markets, things will most certainly be worse with the remaining franchises.  Since many of these teams have no intention, or ability to spend to the cap anyway...what happens to the earning power of the middle class.  Or more importantly, their place in the league.

    The cap....is a place for the big dogs to hide behind, while laughing all the way to the bank.  Because the cap didn't go up as much as "assumed", many teams are dealing with discomfort, and some tough decisions right now.  Imagine what happens to the competitive balance...the whole structure.... if the cap goes "down' by 2 mil'.

    I like business, and commerce and economics.   But that's not why I'm a huge Bruin hockey fan.  In fact, my engagement in hockey is in great part, a release....escapism from fekin beancounters, and greedy bastards. 

    Gettin harder to escape.

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

    Re:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    Not that I make it a habit of trying to interpret bim or anything, but I think the point is playoff performance, not so much comparing the goaltender to the first line C.  I took it as "Krejci has been huge in the playoffs in the past and should get paid for it."

    Bringing up Rask here is like saying "shuperman" five times in front of a mirror.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!



    :-).  I dont see the comparison either.   If they were comparing DK would be worth 25m a year.  One was huge in a cup year.  One has chased away all the talent to win him one.  But hey, he has a vezina and the presidents trophy. 

     

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

    Re:

    If he got this deal, then this guy is worth this much.

    This may happen, and it even may happen often, but it's not a rule.

    Jeff Finger's deal didn't set the market.  Marty Lapointe's deal didn't set the market.  Very modern:  Ovechkin's deal didn't set the market.  Sure there are times when Superstar A says he wants to be the highest paid player, but that's for the elite only.  Imagine an agent calling up Mr. GM and saying, "Listen, we're just looking for for a fair deal.  You know that Tampa gave Stralman $22.5M.  If he's worth that, then my guy is looking at $24M at the least."

    I imagine the GM saying one of two things:

    1.  Call Tampa and see if they'll give your guy that money.

    2.  If your guy was Stralman, I would give him $22.5M.

    I cannot imagine the GM saying, "Jeez.  You're right.  They're similar players.  They deserve similar money."

    (And therefore, all of this "If Orpik gets that money, then Boychuk gets this money" stupidity can end.)

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re:

    Still can't believe EO Wilson got dropped here.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from bim09. Show bim09's posts

    Re:

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:


    In response to bim09's comment:
    [QUOTE] 


    If Rask, the last line of defense, got 7 million a year and he shrinks in the post season, the first line of offense that doesn't shrink in the playoffs should see at least as much.  Krejci will get more than 6.5.  I'd bet on it


    What a useless comparison. What's next? Are you going to suggest that krejci deserves a huge raise because Kobe Bryant can slam dunk?[



    No, I'll just point to the 2010 playoffs.  Whether you want to admit it or not DK stirs the Bruins offensive drink.

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

    Re:

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:


    Still can't believe EO Wilson got dropped here.




    I think I dropped EO when the conversation revolved around the thread topic. Specialization of topic is limiting. General discussion is needed. It was a lame axx attempt on consilience???!!   Book , JM, et al have done great creating threads.  It is much needed. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share