Chicken Little Brigade

If Boston's spotty start wasn't enough to get the typical naysayers going in full force, events of the past week should ramp their cries up to full volume. Trading Kobasew for spare parts while announcing Lucic's impending absence would have been enough to bring out the boobirds but then to have Savard go down? Even otherwise sensible fans are joining the 'Chicken Little Brigade' and declaring the Bruins season over before it has even truly started! It honestly makes me hate being a Boston fan at times with the pervasive desire for instant gratification you see from so many supposed diehards.

Now I am not trying to say the loss of Savard and Lucic is nothing... it will definitely have an impact on the Bruins game. However, I choose to look at the positive aspects of this situation of which there are thankfully plenty.

1 - Timing
Would you rather the Bruins lost Savard in October or in March? Early in the year troubles can be overcome, often with relative ease... just look at the Penguins of last season. They were out of the playoffs in the 10-spot as late as February 28th! So why worry so about early points? The Bruins don't need to lead the Northeast from wire to wire again... they just have to stay in the running until they get back to full health. After all, playoff performance is all that should truly matter.

2 - Opportunities
Let the kids see the ice. Sobotka has been bouncing between Providence and Boston for two years now... its about time the Bruins find out what they really have in him. Is he an AHL all-star who can't cut it in the NHL as his performance would suggest thus far or is he a legit NHL player? No way of finding out until he sees regular icetime and now is as good a time as ever for that to happen. This also gives Boston an opportunity to get Brad Marchand some invaluable experience... in his debut last night he definitely looked like he belonged. Played with no fear or nerves for 15 minutes, including 1:45 on the PK and earned his first career assist. Very promising debut for Boston's 2006 third round selection.

3 - Motivation
With a player of Savard's caliber absent, the rest of the team knows it has to step up to fill that void. All 13 forwards on that roster now feel the need to up their game and help cover for Savard's lost production, none moreso than Patrice Bergeron and David Krejci. Bergeron has been looking more and more like the player Boston signed to a hefty contract in 2006 and has been one of Boston's best thus far. If Patrice can carry more of the load offensively and return to his 70-point game Boston becomes that much more dangerous a team.

4 - Financial
After the trade for Paille and Lucic's injury, Boston's daily cap hit fell $4.4K shy of the upper limit which prorates to $850K (Lucic's cap hit). In other words, Boston was right up to the cap and had little wiggle room. With Savard being replaced by Whitfield, Boston's daily cap hit falls $28,180 below the limit (Savard's daily pay) for a daily saving of ~$24K. If the roster remains static for the duration of Savard's time on LTIR, the Bruins will see the following savings against the cap:

30 days - $737K*
45 days - $1.093M*
60 days - $1.450M*

So before any more fans foolishly join the Chicken Little Brigade, maybe they should think about the potential long-term benefits from this situation. Boston will have additional cap space, more experienced depth players and stronger, more resilient personnel... all crucial elements for a long playoff run!


I should add, after seeing Paille play last night I am very pleased with the outcome of the Paille/Kobasew trades. It was Paille's hard-work and willingness to get dirty in the corners and behind the net that allowed Begin to score the game-winner last night. Boston improved draft picks while lowering their cap with minimal on-ice impact. Don't believe me? Then check out this objective analysis. Oh, and let's not forget that Chuckie was a UFA while Paille is an RFA.

*Note: This is based on my understanding of the LTIR's impact on cap space per the NHL's CBA. By no means should this be taken as being gospel truth.

New beginnings...

Thanks to my good friend Dan, I was able to get tickets to a dozen Bruins home games this year including an all-important Montreal Canadiennes game. This means that the 2009-2010 Bruins season has officially begun in my mind! Thus, I am back on here ready to go at this for a second year... hopefully I will be posting more frequently but nobody should hold their breath (blue skin just really isn't pretty...)


To begin with, I am going to ignore the elephant in the room and look into something that really bothered me this offseason. Last season, for the first time ever I was the proud holder of a 'season ticket'-ish 12 game pack for the Bruins. By buying in bulk, I was guaranteed a shot at playoff tickets and got the regular season tickets at 75% off or roughly $42 for solid balcony seats. As much as I would love to get full season tickets, I just can't justify the cost and the added transportation problems (I live 25 miles due west of the Garden and pay $20 for parking) and so I was debating getting a similar package as last season. Until I saw the price...

$63

Ticket prices went up a full 50% from last season! While I understand that the Bruins were very successful last year and therefore it only makes sense to raise prices, that kind of increase is ridiculous gouging! Now it turns out that the majority of season tickets saw either no increase (if purchased before March 18) or minimal increase in cost (5% if purchased before April 30) which does make the situation more palatable. Basically, the team is sticking it to the new fans who are jumping on board now and to those who haven't been steadily supplying their income before this year. A sound business practice I suppose given the ridiculous season ticket totals (up 5K to 13,200) but still brutal for fans like me who are stuck in between categories. The real concern now becomes next season... there is no guarantee the prices will remain fixed again.


Now for the elephant in the room... the trading of 22yo, 36-goal scoring Phil Kessel to divisional rival Toronto. Before getting into my thoughts on the trade, there is one thing about this that absolutely astounds me...

At last season's trade deadline, there was rumors of a deal being in place with Toronto to ship them Kessel for Kaberle with Boston also asking for Toronto's #1. Turns out Burke, in his infinite stupidity, thought the offer was Kaberle for Kessel and BOSTON'S #1... needless to say, PC turned it down immediately.

Jump ahead a few months to the actual trade and Kessel gets shipped off for two #1s and a #2. Does that mean that Burke actually values 31yo Tomas Kaberle at THREE first round picks?! Sure looks that way... just boggles my mind!


As for the trade, I am all for it. Way I see it, the guy was asking WAY too much for what he brings to the ice. Sure, Phil has terrific speed and one of the nastiest shots in the game... there is no doubting that. However, what is being doubted is more important... his desire, his toughness, his willingness to play through pain, his understanding of the team concept, his attention to defense... need I go on? Fact is, there just is no room for him under Boston's cap and shuffling the roster to re-sign him would only have proven detrimental going forward. With his big cap-hit on the books for the next few years Boston would have been unable to re-sign team cornerstones Savard (UFA), Lucic (RFA), Wheeler (RFA) and Stuart (RFA) as well as (hopeful) goalie-of-the-future Rask (RFA). The simple facts of life under the cap.

With these picks, Boston now has 5 of the top 60 picks in 2010 (Tampa's 2010 #2 in the Recchi deal). Those picks will be invaluable with the lowering cap predictions and could prove very handy at this seasons trade deadline. Also, while this season's draft is supposedly looking pretty weak, it is not like the Bruins can't trade up to top-3 with the bevy of picks they now have. Now we just have to pull for the Leafs to go 0-for-2010, even if it means Montreal gets 6 wins!

Did Chiarelli screw the pooch?

Let me preface this by saying that by no means am I a Chiarelli-basher nor am I an doom-and-gloom troll as are (sadly) so common in Bruins forums. I generally agree with the moves Chiarelli makes and understand that not every move he makes will be perfect (Schaeffer, Nokelainnen) and that a GM should be judged by the total body of his work (Wheeler, Ryder, Lucic, Krejci, Savard, Chara). However, he really seems to have messed up by signing Thomas to a 4yr, $20M deal, a slight change from previous contract rumors.

The reason I say Chiarelli screwed up is not in the signing itself... the merits of which are definitely debatable but can easily be defended. No, my issue is with his apparent misinterpretation of the CBA. This quote is taken from the Bruins Blog Friday afternoon:

According to a source in the Bruins front office, part of what was driving the club to get the deal done now is that fact that Thomas will turn 35 years old on April 15.

When a player signs a new deal after his 35th birthday, per the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), although he can be bought out (at a two-thirds reduction in pay), his cap number can not be deleted from the club's salary commitments.

For next year, and for either two or three more years, Thomas will be on Boston's books for some $5 million a year. But because he has signed the deal before age 35, the Bruins have the safeguard -- that they would want to execute it -- to be able to buy him out at any time, cut their dollar commitment by one-third, and be able to spread the payments over twice the remaining term of the deal. It is a significant safeguard.

Now we are clearly led to believe by SOMEONE in the front office that the timing of this extension is key and provides the Bruins with some insurance against struggles and/or retirement. However, this is NOT the case as was pointed out by Larry Brooks and James Mirtle via Stanley Cup of Chowder. Curious as to what the disconnect was, I attempted to find answers in the CBA... no easy task for those unfamiliar with legalese such as myself. Here is what I found (transcribed from the CBA):

Actual Club Salary shall be calculated as follows:
All player salary and bonuses earned in a league year by a player who is in the second or later year of a multi-year standard contract which was signed when the players was age 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the league year in which the contract is to be effective)...

The 'league year' in question is 2009 as the extension goes into effect next season. Therefore, the signing counts as 35+ and his cap-hit can NOT be affected by retirement. Only way to lose the 5M cap-hit is via trade or the ever-unappetizing buyout.

Now someone in the front-office was KPD's source and they clearly do not understand how the CBA works. My question is this... was this information allowed out to make the signing look better or was it a mis-interpretation by Chiarelli? Unfortunately, there is no positive answer for this... the former means Chiarelli (responsible for the front-office) lied to the fans... the latter means Chiarelli doesn't comprehend the CBA. Simply put, no good.